Biden DOJ admits they haven't prosecuted a single person for illegally protesting outside SCOTUS justices' homes

[hadit]

The bottom line remains, until that law is superseded by a new law or found to be unconstitutional, it is ILLEGAL to harass SC Justices at their homes. Any other argument is merely sophistry.

 

[Faun]

So you admit not all public property is treated the same.

Exactly why demonstrations meant to intimidate SC Justices can be made unlawful outside their home even on public property.


You just kicked your own ass, Simp.

LOLOL

Too bad for you the Supreme Court ruled public sidewalks are protected by the First Amendment.

 

[Faun]

I never said that all public property is treated the same. I have been making exactly the opposite argument. You are just too fucking stupid To figure it out.

A pity you have to ascribe words to me I never actually said. You doing that reveals even you know I kicked your ass again. I never said you said all public property is treated the same.

 

[Faun]

The strip of land and sidewalk in front of most everyone’s homes around DC is a right of way not for the public but for the municipality and utilities to have unrestricted access to that area. The property owner does however have to cut the grass, remove trash and debris, and shovel snow. The last thing that those strips of concrete and land are for is so dim bulbs can harass the people living there. That feeling is more made up liberal drivel.

Sidewalks are for public use, ya moron. How do you think a neighbor on one side of someone's house gets to a neighbor on the other side when there's a sidewalk? You think Scotty beams them there?

 

[Nostra]

LOLOL

Too bad for you the Supreme Court ruled public sidewalks are protected by the First Amendment.

This law is Constitutional, Simp.

Get back to me when the SC rules on this law.

 

[Nostra]

Sidewalks are for public use, ya moron. How do you think a neighbor on one side of someone's house gets to a neighbor on the other side when there's a sidewalk? You think Scotty beams them there?

This from the Simp who claimed I said all public property is treated the same.

What a moron you are

 

[Faun]

This from the Simp who claimed I said all public property is treated the same.

What a moron you are

A pity you can't quote me saying that.

 

[Nostra]

A pity you can't quote me saying that.

 

[Faun]

LOL

Still not a quote.

 

[Nostra]

A pity you can't quote me saying that.

Right here Simp…….let’s see your spin.

GO!

Of course you demonstrated you don't know the difference between a building and a sidewalk. You think ALL public property is treated the same.

 

[WEATHER53]

Sidewalks are for public use, ya moron. How do you think a neighbor on one side of someone's house gets to a neighbor on the other side when there's a sidewalk? You think Scotty beams them there?

The public is permitted access and you comprehend about 25% of the total issue. The public is granted access easement but it’s not public property. It is dirt and sidewalk which the homeowner must clear snow and debris from and cut grass. Municipality will repair a debilitated sidewalk
So the public may traverse the segment for egress but it’s not public property and there is no authorization to go back and forth and “protest” the homeowner. In fact for justices residence it’s illegal.
You have just been given far more fact education than you deserve or can comprehend.

 

[JoeB131]

Interesting, but so far off the reservation I have no idea why you would even ask it. What I am saying, and the law agrees, is that Justices should NOT face attempts via threats or intimidation to force them to vote certain ways on cases they hear, any more than jurors should face such when they are considering the trial. They are supposed to be independent, which is why they are not elected by popular vote.

Well, I have a huge problem with unelected judges making laws.. but that's just me.

Since Rapey Kavanaugh and Serene Joy Barrett OUTRIGHT LIED about their position on Roe, I don't think they get the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Most are charged with trespassing. How can one be charged with trespassing on public property?

The White House is public property, go walk around the lawn and see what happens.

 

[JoeB131]

The bottom line remains, until that law is superseded by a new law or found to be unconstitutional, it is ILLEGAL to harass SC Justices at their homes. Any other argument is merely sophistry.

The bottom line remains, if SCOTUS is going to deprive half the population of their rights, they should spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders.

 

[Nostra]

Well, I have a huge problem with unelected judges making laws.. but that's just me.

Since Rapey Kavanaugh and Serene Joy Barrett OUTRIGHT LIED about their position on Roe, I don't think they get the benefit of the doubt.

Link us up to their lies.

 

[Nostra]

The White House is public property, go walk around the lawn and see what happens.

So you agree laws can be made to restrict access to public property and the law protecting judges and jurors is Constitutional.

 

[Nostra]

The bottom line remains, if SCOTUS is going to deprive half the population of their rights, they should spend the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders.

Dimtard mob mentality on display. If you don't get what you want violence is the answer.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So you agree laws can be made to restrict access to public property and the law protecting judges and jurors is Constitutional.

Of course they can.

 

[hadit]

Well, I have a huge problem with unelected judges making laws.. but that's just me.

Since Rapey Kavanaugh and Serene Joy Barrett OUTRIGHT LIED about their position on Roe, I don't think they get the benefit of the doubt.

1. They're not making laws.
2. Litmus tests for justices are wrong and should never be applied. Justices are supposed to be independent, not tied to a position for life because a liberal is afraid his sacred cow will be gored.

 

[JoeB131]

1. They're not making laws.
2. Litmus tests for justices are wrong and should never be applied. Justices are supposed to be independent, not tied to a position for life because a liberal is afraid his sacred cow will be gored.

Right... like you think it's a conincidence all the right wing judges claimed they would support Roe and then didn't.