In this task, you are given news articles and you need to generate a highlight, i.e., a short summary, with a maximum length of 10 lines.

Ex Input:
(CNN) -- "An unconditional right to say what one pleases about public affairs is what I consider to be the minimum guarantee of the First Amendment." -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo L. Black, New York Times Co. vs. Sullivan, 1964 . It's downright disgusting to listen to conservative and Republican lawmakers, presidential candidates, business owners and media commentators use such vitriol to describe the Occupy Wall Street protesters as hell-bent on destroying America. How in the world can anyone even form their lips to say such a thing when this very country was founded on the basis of dissent? Self-professed rodeo clown Glenn Beck castigates the Occupy Wall Street protesters, but he's always running off at the mouth about the Founding Fathers and how brilliant they were. Without dissent and protest, there is no United States of America! It's as if these folks never picked up a history book to understand how this nation was formed. The very notion of a United States of America started with someone saying, writing and screaming, "Enough is enough!" And when more and more of the early settlers became enraged at the heavy-handed actions of the British, that's when we were on our path to the American Revolution. Do any of these so-called strict constructionists even read the very U.S. Constitution they love to wave in the faces of their critics? Every American, no matter if you're young or old; rich or poor; red state or blue state; Black, white, Asian, Hispanic, Native American; has the freedom to assemble and freedom of speech, which is at the heart of these protests. In this same space, I praised the tea party for not sitting around and complaining. Instead, they organized and mobilized to affect the political discourse in the Republican Party and have definitely had their voices heard. I may disagree with a number of things the tea party advocates, but there is no way I would condemn them for doing it. As Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas said, "The right to revolt has sources deep in our history." It's increasingly clear that some Americans love to talk a good game about protests, yet hate it when someone who opposes their views decides to stand up and be heard. Remember all of those political voices championing the people of Iran taking to the streets to protest? How about Tunisia? Egypt? Libya? Bahrain? What would this world be without protest? We would have never seen freedom in Eastern Europe were it not without the people there, in the words of civil rights activist Fannie Lou Hamer, being "sick and tired of being sick and tired." Praise God that the children of South Africa, led by the African National Congress, didn't ignore the calls of history. If so, Nelson Mandela would be dying in jail and freedom would have never ended apartheid. This nation would not have been forced to make real the very principles cited in the Declaration of Independence, or treat every human being as an equal, were it not for the civil rights movement. Those brave men, women and children chose not to accept the status quo, and this nation and the world are much better off because they did. As a supporter of Occupy Wall Street, I understand fully the sentiment that is being expressed. The massive corporate greed that has devastated the wages of the common worker, and seen the pay of a bunch on Wall Street go through the stratosphere for literally making nothing tangible, has been immoral and obscene. Wall Street and their protectors in Washington -- Democrat and Republican -- say nothing is wrong with making a profit. That is absolutely true. But what is shameful and outlandish is to watch the American taxpayer save the jobs (and big bonuses) of these financial miscreants, only to see them jack up fees left and right. Without the American people they would have had to pack up their belongings and hit the pavement. Instead, they refuse to work with homeowners struggling to meet the big mortgage payments that Wall Street helped underwrite; then sell in exotic transactions that wrecked this nation's financial infrastructure. Conservatives call this an assault on capitalism. No, Occupy Wall Street is about trying to bring some decency and honesty back to an industry that used to have some. Instead, what we have today are literal financial pirates trying to take the largest booty they can find. They don't care about the long-term health of this country. It's all about the next quarterly earnings reports and their massive year-end bonuses. This fight that Occupy Wall Street is engaged in is nothing short of a battle for the soul of this nation. Are we going to continue to allow ourselves to be held hostage by the big banks? Will we continue to allow them to trample over us with their "too big to fail" attitude? No, no, and hell no. It's time to bring these Goliaths to their knees by any means necessary. That mean the young and righteous Davids must protest, march, sit-in, work the halls of Congress and state capitals nationwide, and make it clear that as long as Wall Street, its lobbyists and political protectors continue to mistreat the common man and woman, they are our mortal enemy. Now is not the time to dismiss the protesters as a bunch of lefty college students with no guidance, no substance and no mission. Instead of listening to politicians pimp the next generation, these folks are saying in the words of the founders of the nation's first black newspaper, Freedom's Journal: "We wish to plead our own cause; too long have others spoken for us." The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Roland Martin.

Ex Output:
Without dissent and protest, there is no United States, Roland S. Martin says .
Characterizing Occupy Wall Street protesters as anti-American is disgusting, he says .
Martin: It's not an assault on capitalism, but a call for decency in in the financial industry .


Ex Input:
(CNN) -- The U.S. Justice Department is suing the state of California and Gov. Jerry Brown because prison authorities required a Sikh prison inmate to cut his beard. The lawsuit was filed Tuesday on behalf of Sukhjinder Basra, an inmate at prison in San Luis Obispo in central California. It said that the requirement violated the man's right "to practice his religion" under the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLIUPA). In the Sikh religion, which originated in northwestern India, unshorn hair is an article of faith. The Justice Department said the suit followed a probe "that revealed that California's inmate grooming policy substantially burdens the rights of an inmate to practice his Sikh faith. " "The rights guaranteed by the Constitution extend to all people in the United States," said Andre Birotte Jr., U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California.  "By protecting those rights -- even for those incarcerated -- we strengthen those rights for all." The state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation was also named in the suit. RLUIPA, which became law in 2000, protects the religious freedom of people "confined to institutions such as prisons, mental health facilities and state-run nursing homes," the Justice Department said.

Ex Output:
Justice Department says the inmate has the right to practice his religion .
The inmate grooming policy burdened the inmate's religious rights, Justice said .
"Even those incarcerated" have the right to practice their religions, an attorney says .


Ex Input:
MUMBAI, India (CNN) -- Inside the blacked-out Taj Mahal Palace Hotel, hallways were littered with bloodied bodies. A commando in disguise give details of what went down in the Taj hotel when commandos went in. Terrorists were still holding 200 people 33 hours after the assault began. Knowing next to nothing about what they might encounter in the dark recesses of the hotel, Indian Army commandos decided to go back in -- and were met by terrorists firing mercilessly, throwing  grenades and continuously switching positions. The sound of gunfire and explosions reverberated throughout the hotel's atrium, making it impossible to pinpoint the origin of the shots. Through it all, the commandos walked down pitch-black halls, trying to navigate the damaged hotel without knowing the layout. A commando spokesman, his face and hair swathed in a black scarf and wearing dark glasses to hide his identity, revealed these details of the mission inside the Taj at a news conference Friday. At 6:30 a.m. Friday, the battle at the Taj came to a head with a final firefight at the room holding the 200 hostages, he said.  Watch what it was like inside the hotel for commandos » . When the gunfire stopped, commandos -- known as the Black Cats -- entered the room and freed all 200 hostages. Their difficulties had been apparent from the beginning, he said. "We did not know the layout of the hotel," the commando told reporters. "There was one person on the hotel staff who was helping to guide us around." They entered the hotel for the first time essentially blind to what was ahead. They had no idea what kind of people they would encounter, what kind of weapons might be pointed at them, and whether they might be blown up by explosives.  Learn more about the Taj's past and future » . "Then we heard gunshots on the second floor and we rushed toward the fired shots," he said. "While taking cover we found that there were 30 to 50 bodies lying dead. At that point we also came under fire. The moment they saw us, they hurled grenades." When the shots stopped, the commandos moved toward the source of the gunfire.  See the first photos from inside the Taj Mahal hotel » . "At that time, they vanished ... they had gone elsewhere," the commando said. The attackers had a clear advantage, commandos said, because it was apparent from their movements they knew the hotel's layout. Some tourists rescued from the hotel said the building's large dome and a massive atrium made the sounds of gunfire and explosions reverberate endlessly. It was impossible to pinpoint where the shooters were. Because of the darkness, commandos could not tell how many terrorists were there -- were there many, or only a few who continued to change positions? At one point, commandos believed some of the terrorists were hiding on the eighth floor. As the commandos approached one of the rooms, attackers opened fire at them and said all the people in the room were dead. "We fired at them and they fired at us, but because the room was absolutely dark and we had just gotten [inside] it made it difficult for us," the commando said.  Watch commandos talk about fighting the attackers » . During the fight, two commandos were shot. They decided to flush out the terrorists by blocking entry and exit routes. But the attackers knew all the doors, he said. When they made it inside the room, the terrorists had disappeared again. Inside that room, commandos found AK-47 ammunition rounds, including seven magazines fully loaded, and 400 other rounds for other weapons. They found grenades, credit cards, U.S. notes, foreign money and bags of dried fruit, which they believed helped sustain the attackers during the siege. During the three-day assault, the attackers fired indiscriminately. But the commandos were forced to use caution. "Let me tell you one thing," the commando said. "Within the first exchanges of fire, we could have got those terrorists -- but there was so many hotel guests -- there were bodies all over and blood all over. And we were trying to avoid the causalities of civilians. We had to be more careful in our fighting." In trying to rescue hostages and trapped civilians, commandos had to convince guests they were there to help, not terrorists trying to trick them, Indian Army Lt. Gen. Noble Thamburaj said. "There are a number of rooms that are locked from inside," he told reporters.  "It is possible that some of the hotel guests have locked themselves in and for their own security and safety. Even though we have identified ourselves they are not opening the doors." The overall operation may have been made more difficult because of a late start, CNN sister station CNN-IBN reported. CNN-IBN said that attacks at the Taj Mahal Hotel were well under way at 9:30 p.m. Wednesday, but unnamed sources said the commandos were not given the go-ahead to take part in the rescue until midnight. Those sources told CNN-IBN said that once the commandos got the go-ahead, it took nearly three hours for them to leave for Mumbai from their undisclosed location. Once they arrived, the sources said, commandos had no precise maps of the hotel layout or its access points. While local police and other officers were at the scene, the sources said, the commandos and army special force units are the only ones equipped and trained to rescue hostages.

Ex Output:

Disguised commando tells reporters rescuers entered unknown layout in the dark .
Commandos had to avoid hurting civilians, convince them they were not terrorists .
Attackers knew layout well, moved around frequently, commando says .
33 hours after siege, commandos rescued 200 people from Taj Mahal Hotel .