I don't get what the problem is. The law is to prevent people from entering restricted areas, so what am I missing?
I think they worded it like that so it wouldn't cause as much of an uproar as it should. I think the actual content of it is that it is illegal to participate in any anti government protesting on any government property. Most protests take place on government owned property, and they can call pretty much whatever they want restricted.
“In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.”
