Sorry it took me so long to respond, pEarl. I was off having political discussions about Russia/Ukraine with the other adults. There, there now. I left you some attention. lol
Happy Mother's Day! More Voters Approve Than Disapprove of Overturning Roe
- Thread starter Earl
- Start date
Sorry it took me so long to respond, pEarl. I was off having political discussions about Russia/Ukraine with the other adults. There, there now. I left you some attention. lol
There are limitations to the First Amendment and protesting at the home of US Supreme Court Justices is one of them.It's all a horrible commie plot meant to give you fascists strokes. Never mind that pesky First Amendment thing.
Just so you know, protesting ≠ "intimidation."
You won’t have my attention in the future.
18 U.S.C. § 1507 (subsection numbers added),
Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or
with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty,
pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or
in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or
with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
A similar provision focused just on picketing outside courts (equivalent to subsection 3 above) was upheld in Cox v. Louisiana (1965); and the logic of that decision would apply equally to residential picketing (subsection 4 above). [UPDATE: Note that U.S. v. Grace (1983), struck down a total ban on demonstrations near the Supreme Court; but the law there was "not limited to expressive activities that are intended to interfere with, obstruct, or impede the administration of justice," as Justice Marshall's separate opinion noted.] Here is Cox's logic, which was set forth in a protest of an impending trial, but which I think would apply to protests of an impending appellate decision as well:
Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or
with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty,
pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or
in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or
with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
A similar provision focused just on picketing outside courts (equivalent to subsection 3 above) was upheld in Cox v. Louisiana (1965); and the logic of that decision would apply equally to residential picketing (subsection 4 above). [UPDATE: Note that U.S. v. Grace (1983), struck down a total ban on demonstrations near the Supreme Court; but the law there was "not limited to expressive activities that are intended to interfere with, obstruct, or impede the administration of justice," as Justice Marshall's separate opinion noted.] Here is Cox's logic, which was set forth in a protest of an impending trial, but which I think would apply to protests of an impending appellate decision as well:
Odd that protestors are hanging out at the Homes of the Justices, isn't it...knowing that it won't influence them... Odd that there are any protests at all....they are getting pro-life votes, though, with their crazy disruptive displays...and then there are the handmaiden gals with the little capes and hats...
If listening to and watching interviews (and the little marches) of those people don't make you want to be a right to life advocate, then you're not watching and listening...Odd that protestors are hanging out at the Homes of the Justices, isn't it...knowing that it won't influence them... Odd that there are any protests at all....they are getting pro-life votes, though, with their crazy disruptive displays...and then there are the handmaiden gals with the little capes and hats...
Yes.
“SUPREME COURT Published May 10, 2022 2:08am EDT
DOJ silent on abortion protests at justices' homes despite federal law prohibiting 'pickets' to influence case”
Why no arrests?
That wouldn't be woke...Anyway....Kamala would just bail them out and invite them to lunch... Then set them free... I am sure that she is all about this issue...
Yes, I have no doubt that she would bail them out.
Imagine, if you will, the Vice President of the United States, aiding and abetting the criminals who are violating the US Code.
And a president who takes an oath to defend the Constitution upon which our laws are based and then not enforcing those laws.
Stunning.
ExpressLane
Verified User
Exactly.Odd that protestors are hanging out at the Homes of the Justices, isn't it...knowing that it won't influence them... Odd that there are any protests at all....they are getting pro-life votes, though, with their crazy disruptive displays...and then there are the handmaiden gals with the little capes and hats...
Life is Golden
The Sage
I agree. The ones who will kill them close to full-term take the word murder to a new level.
And then they get mad when you say it is killing babies. They want to sugarcoat it with words that have nothing to do with the act, like rolling a turd in powdered sugar. Uhhh, no. It is what it is.
Life is Golden
The Sage
Just the typical bunch of Antifa thugs, doing what they do best, destruction.Odd that protestors are hanging out at the Homes of the Justices, isn't it...knowing that it won't influence them... Odd that there are any protests at all....they are getting pro-life votes, though, with their crazy disruptive displays...and then there are the handmaiden gals with the little capes and hats...
You know what the voters would decide. But libs only get legislation pushed through by activist judges, never by real votes. When people see what they are really selling, the voters always slam the door in their face.
These groups don't even know what they're selling...that's the real tragedy here....