again, change facts so at uc davis it were a speaker promoting trans rights and equality, but proud boyz, klanzmen or other wackjobs showed up to protest. am having no idea what story you read, 'cause you didn't share, so am not knowing what you deem to be cops censoring, or what amounted to dispersing o' protest, or what were the explanation as to why the cops felt justified in doing so. in any event, if at some point the local police intervened and began dispersing the klansmen protesting a trans speaker invited to uc davis, would you have excused resulting klansmen violence?
maybe you would. maybe you believe violence and mayhem is the proper universal response to censorship. it isn't, but maybe that is your belief. even so, am wondering if your indignation is same if is villains such as white supremacists committing violence, eh?
btw, IF the local and university cops at the charlie kirk event had dispersed a peaceful protest on a state university campus w/o justification, then am personal able to think o' at least ten excellent lawyers who would take the protester's resulting first amendment case pro bono. however, IF the protesters resorted to violence...
furthermore, police busting up a peaceful protest w/o any justification woulda' been even bigger news than the uc davis knuckleheads who got suckered by charlie kirk and his proud boys.
"Though I may not be here with you, I urge you to answer the highest calling of your heart and stand up for what you truly believe. In my life I have done all I can to demonstrate that the way of peace, the way of love and nonviolence is the more excellent way. Now it is your turn to let freedom ring."
am able to imagine situations where we would reluctant choose to embrace violence as a form o' protest, but the uc davis situation, even as you describe, is unlikely to satisfy our personal threshold.
HA! Good Fun!