Comments

Americans don’t approve of protests at the homes of SCOTUS justices — 12 Comments

1. The Queen of Misinformation (Msinformation) better get busy and scrub those poll numbers. Maybe Circle Back Raggedy Ann can sort it out at MSNBC?

2. Will most Democrats continue to feel the same should the ruling on this most contentious of issues be announced with the expected opinion? The willingness of the Democrats to support not simply raucous “protests”, but violence and lawlessness and thuggery as well, could be observed long before the destructive Antifa/BLM mobs of 2020’s “Summer of Love” were almost universally defended on the left. One hopes that this summer (leading towards fall’s election, which may not go well for the Democrats but is likely to be fraught with fraud and irregularities) will be less crazed and unhinged, but the amount of mass hysteria amongst “progressives” is disturbing indeed.

3. The “protesters” and their doxxing enablers are gutter scum.

   The same can be said for the “Biden” administration writ large.

4. Sure. Most Americans didn’t “approve” of BurnLootMurder rioting either, but for the Ds social chaos is part of the plan…and the guy bumbling around the White House lost sort of approves…at least in between yelling fits they tell him he does.

5. Particularly noteworthy is that the pollsters did not ask or perhaps decided not to publish the results of the most relevant question of all;

   Given that it is a Federal Crime to protest at judges homes, should protesters have been informed of this and any who refused to immediately leave, promptly arrested and prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

   Rhetorical question; where was the FBI? Federal Marshalls?

   In his failure to even investigate, AG Garland is guilty of Dereliction of Duty.

6. Geoffrey Britain:

   I believe it’s a federal crime to protest at their homes for the purpose of changing their minds or influencing them about a decision. In other words, it might be okay to do after a decision. At any rate, these protests were prior to the decision and so should be assumed to be for the purpose of changing their minds. But if that has to be affirmatively proven in some way, then it would be a toothless law because it would be hard to prove although easy to infer.

7. What would the response be from the WH if demos were held in front of the Liberal Three, trying to get them to change their votes to supporting Alito.

   I don’t like demos at private homes at all, no matter who is doing the demos or whose house it is.

8. It is also illegal in Virginia.

9. What would the response be from the WH if demos were held in front of the Liberal Three, trying to get them to change their votes to supporting Alito.

   Kagan and Sotomayor live in apartment buildings in DC. It’s kind of lame-o to be picketing all of their neighbors. Also, the U.S. Attorney’s office in DC as well as the federal judiciary in DC are abusive swine and will hold people in jail for over a year for submisdemeanor violations.

10. @ Robert > “It is also illegal in Virginia.”

    Once again showing that electing a Republican governor for one specific reason pays dividends on others.
    @ Neo > “But if that has to be affirmatively proven in some way, then it would be a toothless law because it would be hard to prove although easy to infer.”
    Indeed.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2022/05/11/gov_youngkin_attorney_general_garland_must_enforce_the_law_and_stop_the_intimidation_of_supreme_court_justices.html

    Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) said he and Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland to prosecute those demonstrating outside the homes of Supreme Court Justices.

    “This leak was done in order to influence and, oh, by the way to intimidate our justices,” Youngkin said on Wednesday. “And that’s exactly what these parades and picket lines and demonstrators are trying to do, is influence and intimidate our justices.”

    “It’s on the federal books that, in fact, that’s punishable with up to a year in prison. And, therefore, Governor Hogan and I have asked the attorney general to do his job and enforce this law. This is just fundamentally wrong to have people showing up at the justices’ homes and trying to influence and intimidate them,” he said.

    “We have asked Attorney General Garland to enforce the law and to make sure that these demonstrators are not allowed to try to intimidate justices, like they’re trying to do,” Youngkin said. “It’s clearly in the federal statute that this is wrong, and the attorney general needs to enforce it.”

    However, he isn’t holding his breath until the AG gets around to doing his job.

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/may/11/virginia-governor-calls-expanded-security-around-s/

    Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin requested an expanded security perimeter around the Fairfax County residences of three Supreme Court justices amid concern over pro-choice protests outside the homes.

    In a letter to the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, the Republican governor asked them to order that the local police build an “expanded security perimeter.”

    Bonus for Virginians:

    CAVUTO: Governor, if I could switch to another story where you have made some news, is, you’re for suspending the gas tax in Virginia, I believe for six months.

    And where does that stand?

    YOUNGKIN: Well, there’s a moment for common sense and making sure that we keep our justices safe, and also to get the — get the runaway fuel costs down.

    And this is a moment where common sense needs to prevail. We see gas prices in Virginia, across the nation at all-time highs. We were up over $4.20 earlier this week. And there’s more than — more than enough funds in the Virginia coffers. We’re — actually have a billion dollars more in our Commonwealth Transportation Fund than we thought we were going to have.

    And so we can suspend the gas tax for three months, and then slowly bring it back towards the end of the summer.

    I don’t know if he has the statutory power to do this, but I doubt even the Leftists will complain about it.

11. An observation in re Youngkin and Virginia law: a Federalist writer, in a post with a negatively spun headline, is upset that he isn’t doing MORE RIGHT NOW, and is obviously unhappy that the State Government cannot unilaterally exert police power for a manifestly good purpose.

    Youngkin’s AG Miyares explained the legal situation: there is indeed a state statute making those kinds of protests at a personal residence illegal, but the county has the enforcement role, not the state.

    It’s sad to see pundits on the Right making the same demands as Leftists — for opposite values of “good purposes” of course.

    https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/13/virginias-gop-leaders-are-refusing-to-enforce-the-law-against-leftists-harassing-scotus-justices/

    While such rhetoric may seem meaningful, Youngkin, along with Miyares, says he cannot enforce Virginia state law that would hold demonstrators accountable for their illegal actions. As detailed in § 18.2-419 of the Virginia Code, “Any person who shall engage in picketing before or about the residence or dwelling place of any individual, or who shall assemble with another person or persons in a manner which disrupts or threatens to disrupt any individual’s right to tranquility in his home, shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor,” which constitutes as “a fine of not more than $500.”

    When asked if Miyares intends to pursue charges against violators under the statute, a representative for the attorney general told The Federalist that “[u]nder Virginia law, local Commonwealth’s Attorneys are responsible for prosecuting violations of [the] statute.”

    “Attorney General Miyares urges every Commonwealth’s Attorney to put their personal politics aside and enforce the law,” said spokeswoman Victoria LaCivita.
    …
    When pressed on enforcement of § 18.2-419, Youngkin told The Federalist that the statute is “barely more punitive than a parking ticket.”

    “The federal statute is absolutely clear that parading and picketing in order to influence a justice is punishable with up to a year in prison,” he said in reference to 18 U.S. Code § 1507. “This is a time where local law enforcement, state law enforcement, and federal law enforcement need to collaborate and come together in order to make sure that we are upholding the law and keeping people safe.”
    …
    Local CAs are given numerous statutory duties, but specifically tasked under Va. Code Section 16.1-232 with the prosecution of felony charges within their jurisdiction and the discretion to prosecute misdemeanor charges before such court.”

    Would Miyares support a prosecutor using his discretion to NOT prosecute charges?
    Maybe, or maybe not, depending on how much he values campaign promises, but he still has to act within the law as a state official.

    Throughout the 2021 Virginia election cycle and beyond, Miyares has routinely cast himself as a “law and order” figure willing to be tough on crime. In a December op-ed for the Washington Examiner, for instance, Miyares pledged that if Virginians’ local prosecutor wouldn’t enforce the law, he would.

    “When an elected commonwealth’s attorney publicly states that he will not prosecute a crime, citizens should have a backup plan to ensure that victims get their day in court,” he wrote.

    The post’s author should have asked what the backup plan will be, given the legal texts on this issue.

    PS
    Neo’s new post on “Law at its core” sort of addresses the issue.

12. It’s sad to see pundits on the Right making the same demands as Leftists — for opposite values of “good purposes” of course.

    The division of labor between the state attorney-general and the local district attorney varies from state to state.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>