Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calls for people to get “into the streets”

A recent Department of Homeland Security report warned about the rising likelihood of violence in the wake of the ruling. Ocasio-Cortez is one of 27 House Democrats who recently opposed a bill that bolstered security measures for the justices, following protests outside their homes. The legislation was held up in the House because Democrats had conditioned its passage on adding similar security for Court clerks.

Calls to pass the measure grew more urgent after an armed man was arrested outside the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh earlier this month. The gunman later confessed to plans to assassinate the justice.

"The hell with the Supreme Court—we will defy them," Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.)

"You see this out here?" Waters added, referencing the size of the protest outside the Court. "You ain’t seen nothing yet."

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) said on Fox News he believes there is a "real risk of violence" following the decision. He condemned Democrats whom he believes are inciting it.

Justices ALREADY have the protection.
 
their FAMILIES did not. If Judge k wasnt there that night there wouldbe no security there.

and it's illegal to even 'peacefully protest' a judges house if he's hearing cases for rulings

You'll have to provide a link for that.

And how can a "peaceful protest" put the families at risk? By that logic, there should not be any peaceful protest ANYWHERE.
 
Did she say SCOTUS was illegitimate? Or that the decision was?
If a decision is "illegitimate" it means SCOTUS authority is also.
If she had said "wrong" "improperly ruled" etc. then she would be OK
But she chose illegitimate -casting aspersions on the court itslef
 
You'll have to provide a link for that.
And how can a "peaceful protest" put the families at risk? By that logic, there should not be any peaceful protest ANYWHERE.
no im not going to bother showing you the details were for judicial protection -but did not include family member (why the new law added family members)
You spend you life on this board -you look it up
the peaceful protest is banned at jurors houses because it's an attempt to influence the judge
 

pcwigJE.gif
 
no im not going to bother showing you the details were for judicial protection -but did not include family member (why the new law added family members)
You spend you life on this board -you look it up
the peaceful protest is banned at jurors houses because it's an attempt to influence the judge

So you lied. That's what I thought.

So you think those Justices are weak minded? You have a low opinion of them.
 
a great Steely Dan album, but calling a decision illegitimate is attacking the courts authority/process

Applying your logic, saying that the decision is wrong means the SCOTUS is wrong and should be replaced with the right Justices.
 
Applying your logic, saying that the decision is wrong means the SCOTUS is wrong and should be replaced with the right Justices.
SCOTUS can make "wrong decisions" that's their plenary power..Plessy vs. Ferguson for ex was wrongheaded.
but it doesn't mean you can impeach them out - or whatever nefarious ideas you have in your head
 
SCOTUS can make "wrong decisions" that's their plenary power..Plessy vs. Ferguson for ex was wrongheaded.
but it doesn't mean you can impeach them out - or whatever nefarious ideas you have in your head

I was showing you how retarded your logic is.
 
Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
Applying your logic, saying that the decision is wrong means the SCOTUS is wrong and should be replaced with the right Justices.

I'm sure they will all be replaced.......over the next 35-40 years or so.......
 
Back
Top