Supreme Court asks Maryland officials to stop people picketing at justices’ houses

[Dogmaphobe]

You sound like a thug.

These Chicoms have no respect for human life whatsoever.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

The supreme court stole a human right from people in an atmosphere where civil war was already brewing. They'll be lucky to survive the decade.

Human right to kill the most innocent among us.

GFY loon

 

[HenryBHough]

Democrat ruled states enforcing laws????

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

A "right' created out of thin air by the very same SCOTUS.

Yes, we call these "constitutionally protected, unenumerated rights", in educated circles.

 

[meaner gene]

This decision was going to happen eventually.

The hard fact is, regardless of what you think about abortion itself, that the 1973 Supreme Court acted illegally, seizing for itself, a power that rightfully belonged to the legislative processes of the individual states.

Even without the backlash against the degree to which the pro-child-murder side has pushed the cause far beyond the ersatz “right” established in 1973, there remain enough of us, and will always remain enough of us, who believe that the murder of an innocent human being is never morally acceptable, and should never be legally acceptable, that sooner or later this case was going to have to find its way back to the Supreme Court, which, if it was honest, would have no choice but to admit to, and overturn, the error made by their predecessors.

the murder of an innocent human?

First you need to determine when the union of two cells becomes human. And then when does that human, become a person.

In law, rights and obligations are given to "persons" not humans, as a person is a legal concept not a moral one. While there may be a moral obligation to protect other humans, there is no legal obligation. That is enacted under law upon persons. And the definition of persons can be found in Scott v Sandford USSC 1857, amended in part by the 14th amendment of the Constitution.

Yet the 14th amendment requires states to give it's citizens the privileges and immunities of the several states. Which means leaving the decision to the individual states, a dangerous situation when the states can't agree.

 

[pknopp]

No, screw YOU.

Libtards are like a bunch of ignorant two year olds.

When they throw a tantrum you don't coddle them, you spank them to show them where the boundaries are.

The demofucks need to be slapped down a few times.

I always chuckle when I get called a liberal for supporting the people's Constitutionally protected civil rights.

 

[scruffy]

You sound like a thug.

All leftists are thugs.

Every last fucking one of them.

Those who don't rise to the level of real thugs, are wanna-be thugs.

Those are the ones who only come out when there's people around. Like during riots when they can loot stuff

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It is Federal that you cant picket supreme Court Justices.

Wrong. More than that must be shown.

 

[scruffy]

I always chuckle when I get called a liberal for supporting the people's Constitutionally protected civil rights.

Murder is not a right, you dumb fucktard

 

[bripat9643]

I always chuckle when I get called a liberal for supporting the people's Constitutionally protected civil rights.

Harassing people you don't agree with is not a constitutional right.

 

[pknopp]

Murder is not a right, you dumb fucktard

It's a protected act when cops do it.

Supreme Court declines to review limits of police immunity from lawsuits

 

[bripat9643]

Wrong.

I think it is. However, Maryland may have it's own laws on that subject.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I think it is. However, Maryland may have it's own laws on that subject.

To convict under the federal law, intent comes into play. A tough thing to prove.

 

[scruffy]

Yes, we call these "constitutionally protected, unenumerated rights", in educated circles.

In EDUCATED circles everyone knows that unenumerated rights belong to the States. Take it up with your State representative.

 

[pknopp]

Harassing people you don't agree with is not a constitutional right.

Protesting most certainly is. I have no doubt the East India Tea company consider what was done to them as harassment.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If only the Mafia had threatened judges lives to get a favorable verdict.

 

[bripat9643]

To convict under the federal law, intent comes into play. A tough thing to prove.

Thanks for admitting you were wrong.

 

[toobfreak]

They'll be lucky to survive the decade.

HEY BUTTWIPE: You better first just worry about surviving the Midterms first. Only 19 weeks to go.

 

[bripat9643]

Protesting most certainly is. I have no doubt the East India Tea company consider what was done to them as harassment.

Not when your "protest" involves harassing people where they live.

 

[meaner gene]

It has to do with my opinion on stopping people from protesting outside their homes.

Actually it raises an important 1st amendment question. The supreme court said that laws stopping anti-abortion protesters from protesting near abortion clinics was a 1st amendment violation.

Now what's good for the goose, is not god for the gander.