Cotton threatens to block DOJ nominees....

j-mac

Nuthin' but the truth
Oct 8, 2013
24,026
15,805
1,290
South Carolina
Sen. Tom Cotton is threatening to hold up Justice Department nominations over concerns that the Biden administration may not be representing U.S. Marshals who are being sued for actions they took defending the Portland federal courthouse in 2020.


"These courageous officers were attacked by left-wing street militants with weapons such as mortar fire, ball bearings, and blinding lasers," Cotton, R-Ark., said in a letter addressed to Attorney General Merrick Garland. "A refusal to represent these Deputy Marshals would violate the Department’s long-standing practice – not to mention its moral duty – to defend law-enforcement officers when they’re sued for actions in the line of duty."



Sen. Cotton is absolutely right....This is more war on LEO by the Biden administration....And Garland....
 
Why defend an action that was patently unconstitutional?

U.S. Marshals Service unlawfully deputized dozens of local Portland police officers as federal agents despite objections from city officials. The use of federal agents in these ways is a major shift in policy and threatens the independence of local law enforcement, according to the lawsuit. The complaint cites the anti-commandeering doctrine of the Tenth Amendment, which says that the federal government cannot require states or state officials to adopt or enforce federal law.
 
Why defend an action that was patently unconstitutional?

U.S. Marshals Service unlawfully deputized dozens of local Portland police officers as federal agents despite objections from city officials. The use of federal agents in these ways is a major shift in policy and threatens the independence of local law enforcement, according to the lawsuit. The complaint cites the anti-commandeering doctrine of the Tenth Amendment, which says that the federal government cannot require states or state officials to adopt or enforce federal law.
So, it’s ok for libs to attack federal buildings.
 
"The department currently represents or has paid for representation of over 70 federal employees who have been sued in connection with the events in Portland. Indeed, to date, the Department has denied legal representation for only one federal employee in these cases."


Much ado about nothing.
 
Why defend an action that was patently unconstitutional?

U.S. Marshals Service unlawfully deputized dozens of local Portland police officers as federal agents despite objections from city officials. The use of federal agents in these ways is a major shift in policy and threatens the independence of local law enforcement, according to the lawsuit. The complaint cites the anti-commandeering doctrine of the Tenth Amendment, which says that the federal government cannot require states or state officials to adopt or enforce federal law.
It threatens the independence of local law enforcement in Portland, where the cops arent allowed to combat rioters? I dont see how federal agents filling a void is hurting anything.
 
It threatens the independence of local law enforcement in Portland, where the cops arent allowed to combat rioters? I dont see how federal agents filling a void is hurting anything.
It is specifically against the constitution for federal troops to be used for local law enforcement.
 
It doesn't matter what Cotton does. It's ultimately up to the people to vote Democrats out of office. That's the only way to prevent horrendous nominations.
 
It is specifically against the constitution for federal troops to be used for local law enforcement.
nobody was using federal troops…US Marshalls aren’t troops and they can defend federal courthouses from being attacked by demafascist terrorist
 
It is specifically against the constitution for federal troops to be used for local law enforcement.
.

You are correct on that point, but the Feds have found a way around it.
Federal Law Enforcement is under the DOJ and not directly subject to the Military.

I mean the President is still the boss in both cases ... But some folks want to argue about what the word "troops" means.

My position as an independent voter would be ...
"Let them burn it to ground and don't fix it back for them."


(For you crooked folks in the FBI ... That doesn't mean I am starting anything)
.

 
nobody was using federal troops…US Marshalls aren’t troops and they can defend federal courthouses from being attacked by demafascist terrorist
Us Marshals are federal employees.
 
.

You are correct on that point, but the Feds have found a way around it.
Federal Law Enforcement is under the DOJ and not directly subject to the Military.

I mean the President is still the boss in both cases ... But some folks want to argue about what the word "troops" means.

My position as an independent voter would be ...
"Let them burn it to ground and don't fix it back for them."


(For you crooked folks in the FBI ... That doesn't mean I am starting anything)
.

Being the boss doesn't allow him to break the law.
 
Us Marshals are federal employees.
yeah…but they aren’t federal troops

and moreover can enforce federal law, and protect federal property. Your demafascist terrorist don’t have a right to attempt an insurrection and over throw a branch of Govt

The fact Xiden is protecting his terrorist highlights he’s a traitor
 

Forum List

Back
Top