The right to assemble has limitations in time and manner if law exists for such, but to be honest first amendment rights are limited very little and this case is very interesting to me because I don't see any precedent beyond Madsen on individual rights to demonstrate or protest. Any ruling from the judge will be scrutinized heavily. It is an unfortunate thing of course, but rights for one can trump the rights for all and that is the way the constitution is. I see no relative Florida law the judge can use. He may rule however he feels but he may rule and open up the fiasco to the ACLU on challenge. Again, Madsen which ironically comes from Florida went to the supreme court and even in that final decision, protesters need only abide by a 36 foot rule from a private residence of an abortion worker. That would be worthless in this case and initially in Madsen they ruled on a 300 foot buffer which the Supreme Court pretty much said was unconstitutional even in the case of private residences, albeit the decision was rather narrow to abortion worker residences and abortion clinics.
I am watching this closely to see how the injunction is ruled upon. Not only would the judge have to agree to move the protesters a block or more away which is well beyond the 300ft the supreme court ruled against, but he would have to violate "so-called" rights of other folks living around that area. Either way, it is interesting and I think the judge took the easy route in the first ruling basically saying that the protesters were not notified of the hearing. That was to buy time in a difficult decision methinks. Since this is individual action of demonstration and protest, there is no way the HOA could notify each and every "potential" demonstrator before a hearing (there is no petition requirement) so the actions by the HOA of handing out notices is fruitless endeavor imo.