The first question that needs to be addressed with the cancellation of the America First rally is, "Did the city of Anaheim break the law?" The answer is pretty clearly "Yes." The only argument that the city didn't break the law is a half of a sentence in the statement that the venue agreed that there were risks in regard to hosting the event. That doesn't tell us that the venue decided to cancel the event of its own volition, that the venue thought that the risks weren't manageable, or anything of the sort. The statements from the city said at least twice that the event was cancelled due to ideas which are contrary to the city's values.
When I first spoke out against the city's behavior, I mentioned the Skokie case. There's a reason for that. Even if the city legitimately cancelled the rally on the basis of a risk assessment, namely, concerns that they wouldn't be able to control the anger of the local citizens, the Skokie case set in incredibly high bar for such an action. One of the arguments that the town of Skokie made to prevent the National Socialist Party of America from marching was exactly that. The Supreme Court rejected that argument. Let's not forget that the reason why Frederick Douglass wrote A Plea for Free Speech in Boston in response to violent protestors shouting down an abolitionist rally. The state can't and shouldn't disallow speech due to threats issued by people who don't want that speech to be heard.
So, yes, the city of Anaheim broke the law.
Should we care?
Of course we should. If the law doesn't apply to the state, we're not a democratic republic. If it doesn't bother you that the government broke the law, you're not a democrat, you're not a progressive, you're not a liberal, you're a totalitarian who doesn't believe in any moral principle or rule of law; you just want government to be able to operate arbitrarily on the basis of what you view to be expeditious.
Should what the city of Anaheim did be illegal?
Of course it should be. Ideas shouldn't be illegal. Government shouldn't have the power to decide what we can see or hear or read. That's basically what tyranny is in a nutshell. There are a lot of people in the city government who should be facing jail time right now.
It seems far too easy for too many people to join the "but brigade" when it comes to free speech. If you're standing with the city of Anaheim, you're not a liberal.
To be clear, if your response to a statement from the federal, a state, or a local government saying that it cancelled a rally because it ran contrary to the state's values is to ask what the people organizing the rally stand for, you're not a liberal.
It doesn't matter if a team of neo-Nazis reanimated Goebbels and planned an event with him as the keynote speaker, if the government tries to shut down that event, the liberal position is to defend the right of Goebbels to speak.
What people strangely don't realize is that the baggage that comes with being a liberal is defending people's rights regardless of how they use them. The moment that you try to win liberal points by shutting down conservative speech, you're actually only accumulating Nazi points.
It does no one any favors to attempt to fight brown shirts with brown shirt tactics