You were within your first amendment rights to wear leather, but so were the PETA people for objecting to it...their mistake was with not obtaining a permit for a "peaceable protest" and in not conducting themselves within its limits.

1) I don't agree with the statement that PETA members would be forbidden to protest in that place in the future. It is not a case of fairness or unfairness, but just of basic human rights. Of course, you can protest and they can be held responsible if they destruct other people's (your) property, but I don't think that their demonstration right could be suppressed for the future. Freedom of assembly is a basic human right and should be protected. There are some restrictions to that right, of course (for instance peaceful assembly, and the specific restrictions of freedom of speech). As long as the local PETA organisation agree to respect those rules in the future, they should be granted their freedom of assembly. Repeated violation of those rules could produce higher penalties, though. 2) "Freedom of assembly, sometimes used interchangeably with the freedom of association, is the individual right to come together with other individuals and collectively express, promote, pursue and defend common interests. The right to freedom of association is recognized as a human right, a political freedom and a civil liberty. Freedom of assembly and freedom of association may be used to distinguish between the freedom to assemble in public places and the freedom of joining an association. Freedom of assembly is often used in the context of the right to protest, while freedom of association is used in the context of labor rights and the right to collective bargaining, for example by joining a trade union. Freedom of assembly as guaranteed in the Canadian Constitution and the Constitution of the United States are interpreted to mean both the freedom to assemble and the freedom to join an association." Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_assembly