What this means is every ticket to a Trump rally is revocable for any reason, and once you've been informed your ticket has been revoked—even if it's revoked for a silent, peaceful, non-disruptive protest consistent with the First Amendment—they can/will have you forcibly removed https://twitter.com/Phil_Lewis_/status/1274381274610831360

PS/ What I'm struggling with, as a lawyer, is that surely some public funds *are* used (either up-front or as an absolute matter) to put on this event by a private entity—the Trump campaign—so is it really permissible under the First Amendment to have no-cause revocable tickets?

PS2/ Private venue, private security, private entity—that'd be one thing. But Trump has the National Guard at this event. And Tulsa PD. I assume the BOK Center has a public investment component? The main event is a taxpayer-funded individual. And Trump won't pay Tulsa back. So...

PS3/ The media talks about the fact that Trump never reimburses the cities he appears in like it's a tangential matter. But if I'm a judge, I'm holding that a campaign's consistent failure to reimburse taxpayers for events means that these are functionally publicly funded events.

PS4/ But put all that aside.

U.S. media should force the Trump campaign to issue a public statement—even if it's not legally required to do so—explaining why *any shirt* with a Black Lives Matter slogan on it is grounds for *being dragged from a Trump speech by law enforcement*.

PS5/ Like I just want to say to anyone still claiming that Trump isn't a racist and his rallies aren't white supremacist rallies, "Folks—that argument ended when Trump decided that *any person visibly supporting Black Lives Matter* is forbidden from attending one of his rallies."