U.S. Marshals told not to arrest protesters outside justices’ homes, documents reveal

[Marener]

1994 is how far you got to go back?

It’s called precedent.

SCOTUS has no problem with people protesting your house, but definitely wouldn’t let people protest their house.

 

[LeftofLeft]

It is not illegal to protest. There was nothing to arrest people over for protesting. Look at how many places that had to pay out millions for arresting people while simply protesting.

Like this?

 

[BlindBoo]

Lol, people that were praying in front of one gets arrested. Try again.

Not in this county. But funny to see that the Faux not News agitprop still hits it's marks.

 

[jknowgood]

“We were just praying” is what they tell you. They don’t tell you that they were laying in the driveway while doing so.

Nothing, the media and your party would love for that to happen.

 

[jknowgood]

It’s called precedent.

SCOTUS has no problem with people protesting your house, but definitely wouldn’t let people protest their house.

Federal law states you cannot protest in front of a SCOTUS house to influence their decision. I respect that.

 

[jknowgood]

Not in this county. But funny to see that the Faux not News agitprop still hits it's marks.

Bullshit, you can't do anything in front of a planned parenthood clinic. But you loons burn down religious based alternatives, without consequences.

 

[Marener]

Federal law states you cannot protest in front of a SCOTUS house to influence their decision. I respect that.

I don’t respect such a blatant doubt standard. SCOTUS won’t let us pass laws to stop protesting in front of other people’s houses. Why should they get special treatment?

 

[scruffy]

No it isn't. It's not against the law to protest outside of anywhere.

Typical dumbass leftard. ^^^

 

[TNHarley]

There is no exemptions as such in the Constitution.

I am just telling you what the law says and what actually happened

 

[TNHarley]

Protesting Outside of Supreme Court Justices' Homes is Fine, Actually | EarthRights International

The mere fact that direct action causes discomfort does not render it violent, and a large group of protestors gathers is not threatening.

earthrights.org

they are not breaking the law.
and its explained why 18 U.S. Code §1507 doesnt apply.

I have a link that says otherwise. We can do this all day

'It Is a Federal Crime': Why Protests at Homes of Supreme Court Justices Could Violate Federal Law

Pro-choice protesters descended on the homes of conservative Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito, as well as the home of Chief Justice John Roberts in the past few days. The invasion of their family privacy came after their home addresses were posted online by a leftist group...

www2.cbn.com

 

[pknopp]

I am just telling you what the law says and what actually happened

Laws say many things. The Constitution trumps them all.

 

[TNHarley]

Laws say many things. The Constitution trumps them all.

Im not saying it is constitutional. I am, however, saying garland is a lying hack.
He will arrest people at abortion clinics, which isnt constitutional, but he wont this.

 

[pknopp]

Im not saying it is constitutional. I am, however, saying garland is a lying hack.
He will arrest people at abortion clinics, which isnt constitutional, but he wont this.

Condemn Garland all you want. I don't care. People have a Constitutional right to protest.

 

[Marener]

Im not saying it is constitutional. I am, however, saying garland is a lying hack.
He will arrest people at abortion clinics, which isnt constitutional, but he wont this.

Who has been unconstitutionally arrested at an abortion clinic?