Justice Gorsuch Throws Shade at Jamaal Bowman During J6 Hearing, and It’s Glorious

[Doc7505]

Justice Gorsuch Throws Shade at Jamaal Bowman During J6 Hearing, and It’s Glorious​

Justice Gorsuch Throws Shade at Jamaal Bowman During J6 Hearing, and It’s Glorious

pjmedia.com

16 Apr 2024 ~~ By Matt Margolis

On Tuesday, oral arguments commenced in the case of Fischer vs. United States, scrutinizing the legitimacy of felony charges of obstructing an official proceeding against individuals involved in the January 6 United States Capitol riot. The court's ruling will carry significant weight, as it could potentially influence the fate of hundreds of defendants from the January 6 riot and potentially undermine certain federal charges against Donald Trump.
Currently, the conservative wing of the court has expressed doubt regarding the government's case, which U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is making. Notably, Justice Neil Gorsuch posed a question that was epic, to put it mildly.
Specifically, he inquired whether Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who infamously pulled a fire alarm to delay a House vote, could face charges under the same statute.
"What does that mean for the breadth of this statute?" Gorsuch asked. "Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler at today's audience qualify, or a heckler at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?"
~Snip~
No matter what example justices offered, including pro-Palestinian protesters blocking traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge on Monday, or the hypothetical of protesters blocking traffic from Virginia to Washington, D.C., the Biden administration's position that none of these would meet the same requirement.
Curious, isn't it?
I wonder what it was like for Prelogar to stand there as Gorsuch and Alito destroyed her case right before her eyes.


Commentary:
It was a legitimate real-life example that was perfect for the point Judge Gorsuch was making.
The woke attorney defending the DoJ position spluttered in response.
Indeed, Judges Corsuch and Alito made their points.
I don't believe Solicitor General Prelogar won her point and has lost the issue.

​

 

[Doc7505]

​

 

[DudleySmith]

A pox on all thier houses.

 

[konradv]

Justice Gorsuch Throws Shade at Jamaal Bowman During J6 Hearing, and It’s Glorious​

Justice Gorsuch Throws Shade at Jamaal Bowman During J6 Hearing, and It’s Glorious

pjmedia.com

16 Apr 2024 ~~ By Matt Margolis

On Tuesday, oral arguments commenced in the case of Fischer vs. United States, scrutinizing the legitimacy of felony charges of obstructing an official proceeding against individuals involved in the January 6 United States Capitol riot. The court's ruling will carry significant weight, as it could potentially influence the fate of hundreds of defendants from the January 6 riot and potentially undermine certain federal charges against Donald Trump.
Currently, the conservative wing of the court has expressed doubt regarding the government's case, which U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar is making. Notably, Justice Neil Gorsuch posed a question that was epic, to put it mildly.
Specifically, he inquired whether Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), who infamously pulled a fire alarm to delay a House vote, could face charges under the same statute.
"What does that mean for the breadth of this statute?" Gorsuch asked. "Would a sit-in that disrupts a trial or access to a federal courthouse qualify? Would a heckler at today's audience qualify, or a heckler at the State of the Union address? Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?"
~Snip~
No matter what example justices offered, including pro-Palestinian protesters blocking traffic on the Golden Gate Bridge on Monday, or the hypothetical of protesters blocking traffic from Virginia to Washington, D.C., the Biden administration's position that none of these would meet the same requirement.
Curious, isn't it?
I wonder what it was like for Prelogar to stand there as Gorsuch and Alito destroyed her case right before her eyes.


Commentary:
It was a legitimate real-life example that was perfect for the point Judge Gorsuch was making.
The woke attorney defending the DoJ position spluttered in response.
Indeed, Judges Corsuch and Alito made their points.
I don't believe Solicitor General Prelogar won her point and has lost the issue.

​

MAGA revels in such small victories!

 

[elektra]

A brilliant point.

How does a rally for Trump that unwittingly disrupts congress get charged with disrupting congress but pulling a fire alarm is nothing more than a slap on the wrist when it is the Democrat committing a crime with the intent to disrupt congress.

Democrats all across America disrupted the publics life, yet that is all "legal" and allowed to continue?

 

[kyzr]

MAGA revels in such small victories!

Reducing unfair J6 sentences for "crimes" that democrats aren't even prosecuted for is a major victory.

 

[DudleySmith]

Reducing unfair J6 sentences for "crimes" that democrats aren't even prosecuted for is a major victory.

Now we wait and see if the banana republic running the White House does anything but ignore the ruling. Then we wait and watch the Republicans do nothing about it if they don't release the political prisoners. Personally I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for either.

 

[kyzr]

Now we wait and see if the banana republic running the White House does anything but ignore the ruling. Then we wait and watch the Republicans do nothing about it if they don't release the political prisoners. Personally I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for either.

The prisoner bringing the lawsuit to the USSC expects to get a reduced sentence, so I would think that the other "hostages" would get reduced sentences as well.

 

[struth]

MAGA revels in such small victories!

Frankly highlighting and then destroying the demafasict is a massive victory.

 

[DudleySmith]

The prisoner bringing the lawsuit to the USSC expects to get a reduced sentence, so I would think that the other "hostages" would get reduced sentences as well.

Not a certainty yet, but hopefully they get full pardons; few of them were guilty of anything, the worst being guilty of some vandalism. My guess is they just make up some more fake charges and try to bankrupt them.

 

[Rogue AI]

MAGA revels in such small victories!

Wait for the ruling. It appears the corrupt Biden DOJ overreached, or intentionally distorted the law in another disgusting abuse of power. This case touches on the Trump case, so you should get your tissues prepared now.

 

[OldFlame]

Wait for the ruling. It appears the corrupt Biden DOJ overreached, or intentionally distorted the law in another disgusting abuse of power. This case touches on the Trump case, so you should get your tissues prepared now.

Just like they're doing with Trump.

 

[BlindBoo]

So for Gorsuch the Congressman who pulled a fire alarm in an office building should be treated the same as the violent rioters at the Capitol Building on Jan 6th. Didn't he have his day in court and already plead guilty?

Did any of the violent rioters get 20 years for this charge only?

It is a not too surprising a specious argument comes from the current Hacks we have in the SC.

 

[Rogue AI]

So for Gorsuch the Congressman who pulled a fire alarm in an office building should be treated the same as the violent rioters at the Capitol Building on Jan 6th. Didn't he have his day in court and already plead guilty?

Did any of the violent rioters get 20 years for this charge only?

It is a not too surprising a specious argument comes from the current Hacks we have in the SC.

Arbitrary justice is no justice at all. Liberal abuse of power has clearly demonstrated that corruption rules the day in Garland/Biden DOJ.

 

[BlindBoo]

Arbitrary justice is no justice at all. Liberal abuse of power has clearly demonstrated that corruption rules the day in Garland/Biden DOJ.

Pretending Jan 6th rioters and their violent acts at the capital is on par with pulling a false fire alarm is disingenuous especially coming from a High Court Justice.

 

[Rogue AI]

Pretending Jan 6th rioters and their violent acts at the capital is on par with pulling a false fire alarm is disingenuous especially coming from a High Court Justice.

No different than the many protests, sit-ins, and disruptions liberal trash make on a regular basis without facing the same penalties. You folks simply don't comprehend the notion of justice, just revenge and hate.

 

[para bellum]

Gorsuch's question was on point. The statute is an obstruction of justice statute, intended to apply to judicial proceedings, not to the business of Congress.

Gorsuch was asking how far outside the intent of the statute should they go?

There are other Federal statutes that address rioting and civil disorders. Charging them under this statute is over-charging.

 

[BlindBoo]

No different than the many protests, sit-ins, and disruptions liberal trash make on a regular basis without facing the same penalties. You folks simply don't comprehend the notion of justice, just revenge and hate.

Protests are protected by the Constitution. Riots are not. Had the Jan 6th protesters abided by the Capitol police there wouldn't have been a riot declared, never would have been charge with any felony, or had that charge tacked on.

 

[OldFlame]

Pretending Jan 6th rioters and their violent acts at the capital is on par with pulling a false fire alarm is disingenuous especially coming from a High Court Justice.

How is it not 'on par'?

 

[Lastamender]

MAGA revels in such small victories!

Hardly a small victory. What is small is your brain.