Last Wednesday, officers indicated protesters were edging closer to being arrested. Demonstrators take strong exception to the reactions, saying that to whatever extent they disrupt tranquility, it is part of a much more important message — bringing attention to how a number of justices altered the lives of millions — and a message could be even stronger with the residents’ participation. As they chanted recently: “Out of your houses and into the streets!”
“We already have our rights being taken away,” said Sadie Kuhns, 28, who has been a liaison for the abortion rights advocates in conversations with police each week. “We’re having our voices, literally the volume of our voices, policed, on top of everything else that we’ve already been stripped of.”
At a more appropriate location for a protest: "Lawmakers, abortion rights protesters arrested outside Supreme Court/Democratic Reps. Cori Bush, Ilhan Omar and Ayanna Pressley were among the dozens of protesters arrested" (WaPo). The charge was "crowding, obstructing or incommoding." A D.C. law that, we're told is "often cited when arresting protesters during peaceful, planned and coordinated actions of civil disobedience such as the demonstration on Tuesday."
It's not really civil disobedience, because the law they were breaking (allegedly) is not the law they are protesting. They're not protesting the D.C. law against crowding, obstructing, and incommoding by engaging in crowding, obstructing, and incommoding. They are crowding, obstructing, or incommoding to express outrage and call attention to the loss of the right of access to abortion.
The way to engage in civil disobedience to the overruling of Roe v. Wade would be to participate in the delivery of abortion services in a place where state law bars abortion. I'm not recommending that violation of law. I'm just saying that would meet the definition of civil disobedience.
Posts
80 comments:
The Bible (Exodus) stressed long ago that judges are not allowed to be afraid of people. They need to rule honestly whether they are judging the rich, or the poor, or the powerful.
"Honestly" means, in their opinion.
I honestly don't understand what these protestors are thinking.
They are crowding, obstructing, or incommoding to express outrage and call attention to the loss of the right of access to abortion.
They are protesting against a new situation where abortion laws are made by the state legislatures -- not by the nine members of the US Supreme Court.
Civil disobedience? So they were arrested after being hit with fire hoses, had dogs snap at them, and then after being beaten by police while on the ground; they were hauled off in chains? What bravery.
Oh wait, they just walked away with police protection with their hands loose behind their back for a photo op.
Still, if a normal citizen on the right did that, they’d face 2 months in prison for “parading”. Bush, Omar, AOC, will get a latte.
Pretending to get arrested when they were just taking the idiots away from the scene. AOC smiling like a loon, because she thinks she owned us with her fake arrest until she threw up that black power fist!!! What a joke each and every one of them is. WHY aren't they in their offices writing new laws?? Isn't THAT their job?? If they can't do their jobs, and all they want to do is showboat, what the HELL are we paying them for??
Conservatives need to go harass AG Garland at his house for letting this continue. See how he likes it. A complete fucking disgrace.
More images of protesters in Kavanaugh's neighborhood in the handmaids tale garb. That has to be the most garish, retarded, infantile temper tantrum masquerading as a fashion statement you can ever see. It's dumber than the pussy hats even. How old are these women? 9? Did their psychological growth end when they finished the Harry Potter series.
Everything about these people is pretend. They're all stupid little spoiled fucked up actresses. Just like their supposed elected leadership pretending to be handcuffed in front of the SCOTUS, it's daddy issues all the way down.
Question for Ann --
Is it too much to ask for educated people to understand that not all the policies they happen to favor are constitutional rights and not all the policies they happen to disfavor are unconstitutional? I have non-college educated buddies who get this, but my college-educated friends seem oddly incapable of grasping it.
I can't where see harassing Supreme Court justices in their homes, in restaurants, wherever they can be hunted down, is a more effective tool for meaningful change than lobbying legislators or trying to get candidates elected to the state legislature (or Congress) who share your point of view and might work to pass laws to codify the right to abortion.
It's hard to take the protestors seriously when they don't take their own cause seriously enough to do something that might actually make a difference.
I honestly don't understand what these protestors are thinking.
They are thinking that they are special people who see what you don't.
They think they know right from wrong better than you do.
They think this is the most important thing in the world right now and they will fix everything by doing this, starting here.
They know they are doing God's work, whether or not they acknowledge God's existence.
They know there is no possibility that they could be wrong, or that things could go badly if they are victorious.
It's the mentality that made people fly airplanes into towers, and that makes world leaders think about making cities disappear to make their point real, so they will be taken seriously by the rest of the world.
That's what they are thinking.
The point of "real" civil disobedience--deliberately breaking the law you object to, and facing the consequences--would be to galvanize public opinion. This would mean, among other things, changing the minds of judges not because the judges' own families have been threatened, but because public opinion has been demonstrated to be on the side of the protestors. There has been such a thing as jury nullification--juries refusing to convict because they believe the prescribed penalties are excessive, or even that a particular "crime" shouldn't be on the books. This hasn't resulted from jurors and judges facing bomb threats--unless organized crime is involved; it has resulted from very broad shifts in public opinion.
Canada actually had a jury nullification in an abortion case. The famous Dr. Morgentaler had established at least one abortion clinic in Toronto, not in any way part of a hospital, and thus contrary to the law at the time. Morgentaler's team cooked up some bullshit about the defense of necessity--as if Morgentaler or his patients were stuck on a lifeboat, forced to resort to cannibalism. Really the jury just wanted an excuse to acquit, and they did. Public opinion seemed to agree abortion was a service that should be available, at least to some extent, outside of hospitals. Nothing has really been clarified in law ever since--it is often said there is no abortion law in Canada, and access varies tremendously by urban vs. rural, entire provinces, and so on.
I assume the pro-choice protestors are hoping for a national freedom for abortion, with maybe some assurances about access, but I agree with Ann and MikeR that they are barking up the wrong tree. If public opinion were as they wish, they would not be so desperate. Their actions seem unlikely to swing the undecided. Even with M.L. King Jr.'s civil disobedience, there is a danger that instead of extending the protection of the law to those who don't have it, you simply undermine all law.
The Left is always out of control. That's their thing.
AOC pretending to be handcuffed is like AOC pretending to cower in fear on January 6, which is like AOC crying over an empty parking lot.
She is a big phony.
"the very vast majority of people here think that these protesters have gotten out of control."
So what? Progs gonna prog. Are the nice women of American going to stop them by handwringing? Will the police dare to arrest them? Has the DoJ shown up yet?
Out-of-control is prog MO to seize the public square. As they did in 2020. In this case with the added benefit of judicial intimidation.
I have long thought "Lyric Wallwork Winik" one of the great onomastic disasters of our age, but that's just me.
Yes, nothing is as important as their Cause. And they are nothing without their Cause. Without it they would disappear into the fabric of life, with many of them having nothing to offer to society, and no ideas of what do to next to keep themselves feeling important. The Cause is their cause. The good news for them is that there seems to be no dearth of Causes and they can change weekly.
So if this Cause goes kaput, the next is one is waiting for them, in front of someone else's home or office or classroom.
Nothing says 'civil disobedience' like AOC putting her hands behind her- uncuffed- as a policeman gently escorts her across the street. She takes time from her mime-arrest to raise her hand to the crowd in a power salute. Ugh. Such nauseating self-promotion. She exists for the Cause. And like so many politicos, her Cause is Her. That is the beginning and end of it.
AOC Sits in Invisible Police Car.
Last Wednesday, officers indicated protesters were edging closer to being arrested.
Arrested? for WHAT? i mean, aside from the laws against protesting at judges houses ?
Here's Politifact!
Is it legal to protest outside justices’ homes? The law suggests no
You see? There is a law Title 18, Section 1507 of the U.S. Code, which was enacted in 1950. Under this law, it is illegal to picket or parade in front of a courthouse or a judge’s home "with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge."
So, according to politi"Fact", if a law EXPLICITLY describes an action as illegal, then That law "suggests">, that it MIGHT NOT be Strictly legal to perform that action.
(against republicans.. OBVIOUSLY, it would be a FELONY against democrats)
Can one of your smarter folks here explain to me the reason for mass demonstrations in a democracy? Publicity for a cause, I get. But demonstration against oppression?
Maybe along the way you can explain to me why members of one of the governing bodies of the United States would demonstrate in front of the main building of one of the other governing bodies, and get arrested, as a sign of the struggle, as though they were oppressed subjects of an unjust tyrant.
Seems a little bizarre - kind of like Marie Antoinette building a hamlet to play in. They live in the most free republic in the history of the world, but feel this deep need to pretend that they are all struggling against a tyrant.
And yet not one was put in jail without bail. Nice to be a democrat.
This is what liberals are encouraged to do from the podium of the White House Press Secretary, crazy Maxine Waters, and the lecture halls at universities. The Kavanaugh assassination attempt was glossed over…as are public restaurant harassments. I don’t feel so bad for these neighbors. They vote with these people. Now, they’re complaining. Rich.
I didn’t feel too bad for Dane County Sherriff Dave Mahoney when Madison, WI protestors showed up at his house during the 2020 BLM summer of love. Didn’t feel bad for his neighbors either. Or the boarded-up businesses downtown. The left is getting what it wants. They're hypocrites. Especially the wealthy white ones.
It’s like how DC and NYC are bitching because the busloads of migrants being sent to them from Texas and AZ are overwhelming their social services. It’s also like how wealthy white liberals really don’t want black people living near them.
Cry me a river.
Protesting on suburban streets will not change anything wrt the ruling. These protests are simply venting exercises.
The fact that the neighbors complaints are causing the police to start to try to tamp these protests down is interesting. They didn’t think the tactical law enforcement presence at the SCOTUS homes was enough of a reason.
They subscribe to the Pro-Choice ethical (i.e. relativistic, selective) religion, including diversity [dogma] (i.e. color judgment, class-based bigotry), political congruence, sex chauvinistic ideologies, and the performance of human rites for social, redistributive, clinical, political, and fair weather causes. But I'm progressive liberal (i.e. monotonically divergent). Karmic irony.
They wear their green communist bandanas proudly, don't they??
I think it would be interesting to start a protest outside AG Garland's house, to see the difference in coverage and result. However, I'm not so interested that I'm going to organize it.
Call me lazy. Call me privileged.
No one likes riots or protests or civil disobedience in their own neighborhood.
They like to see it on TV, happening in someone else’s neighborhood.
Quayle said...
Can one of your smarter folks here explain to me the reason for mass demonstrations in a democracy?
Simple, because THEY DON'T HAVE THE VOTES. EVERY Time you see a protest, what they are protesting is that THEY DON'T HAVE THE VOTES. If Most people wanted it, they wouldn't have to protest (or be allowed to. When was the last time you saw a protest for voter ID (or, any other thing that most people want))
NIMBY
eh - these leftist pro-death assholes should get themselves sterilized.
This is what liberals are encouraged to do from the podium of the White House
Get in their faces, occupy their cities, surround their vehicles, invade their neighborhoods, destroy their property, intimidate, cancel, etc.
I grew up in that area and I know that the "demonstrators" are completely out of sight of anyone except the neighbors. The "demonstration" is intended to harass the neighbors and suggest that one doesn't want a conservative next door. Typical lefty pettiness. This same general area is the site of Blasey Ford's alleged ordeal. When I grew up there, it was a place where nothing big ever happened and that's still true. On television and the media, it's a place where big events are occurring but in reality it's just a green, leafy place. Very hot and humid outdoors in the summer, terrific summer thunderstorms, plenty of mosquitos in the summer nights.
"Demonstrators take strong exception to the reactions, saying that to whatever extent they disrupt tranquility, it is part of a much more important message — bringing attention to how a number of justices altered the lives of millions..."
Never mind the 55 million or so lives that were not just altered, but terminated based on the prior decision of a number of justices, a decision that arguably was much more severe and final than the most recent decision by a different number of justices. It is my understanding that nothing changed regarding abortion access in Maryland or DC, so why should citizens who were not involved in the justices decision pay a price for a decision that doesn't even affect the protestors? The abortionist crowd has no one to blame but themselves for pushing a unyielding, uncompromising, extreme abortion agenda that the rest of the civilized Western world considers to be barbaric. So, suck it up and try to win supporters rather than screaming at the sky over a fait accompli.
Mike Petrick said…
Question for Ann --
Is it too much to ask for educated people to understand that not all the policies they happen to favor are constitutional rights and not all the policies they happen to disfavor are unconstitutional? I have non-college educated buddies who get this, but my college-educated friends seem oddly incapable of grasping it.
Remember. The Wizard didn’t give the Scarecrow a brain. He gave him a college diploma.
I have a Master’s Degree in Communication from Eastern IL University, 1993. Mid-Level State Party School. I had a blast and knew it was just fantasy camp. I’ll sell it for $50.
"I'm just saying that would meet the definition of civil disobedience."
Or it would be called murder, depending on the State.
I am with David Begley--time for AG Garland to get a little sauce for the gander. These Biden jamokes have gotten a free pass for their arbitrary and political selective law enforcement.
I guess now AOC will think Temujin wants to date her.
"They are crowding, obstructing, or incommoding to express outrage and call attention to the loss of the right of access to abortion."
They were blocking traffic.
Why do the pro-abortion protestors like AOC have a demonic look on their faces?
"The Cause is their cause. The good news for them is that there seems to be no dearth of Causes and they can change weekly."
Ahh... but after awhile all the good causes are taken. So they have to dig down (keyword "down") to find new ones.
Like training your sons to be girls.
I think it would be interesting to find out what percentage of these protesters live in states that now prohibit abortion. My guess would be that percentage would be around 2%.
Imagine, if you will, guns-rights protesters protesting like this day and night outside Elena Kagan's home. How long, do you think, it would be allowed to continue before the protesters were arrested by federal marshals and held without bail for trial?
They are crowding, obstructing, or incommoding to express outrage and call attention to the loss of the right of access to abortion.
Ann still cannot be honest about what the decision means.
We cannot have a Constitutional basis of accord for running our federal government if a bunch of whiny malcontents cannot accept that State Legislatures are the legitimate venues for discussing topics like this as a society.
And Ann is a retired "Constitutional Law Professor."
How many students have as poor or worse understanding of the systemic poison the Roe decision is still inflicting on our body politic?
Who thinks having mobs outside of a judge's house is a good idea? Is there anyone who defend this?
Just Sleepy Joe, I guess.
They are protesting against a new situation where abortion laws are made by the state legislatures -- not by the nine members of the US Supreme Court.
Exactly. First, some, the more stupid, believe that abortion has been outlawed. The rest lie about it. Nothing has been outlawed. They need to work on their state legislatures but most are from the DC area and are getting minimum wage to protest. It's what they do for a living,
This situation cries out for a manure spreader.
what is the end game for these protests?
resignations by Justices?
new appointments to revisit rulings?
or just till 11/2022 elections? hmmmm
Q: if HOA can take your house because you parked car in driveway and not garage - can they take away house for noise pollutions due to protesters
sounds like these insurrectionists should be booted from Congress for their criminal attempt to subvert our democracy.
Dave Begley makes a good point above..... why aren't pro-life people protesting at the homes of Kagan, Sotomeyor, etc? Even though they lost, they still voted in favor of killing babies. Why aren't the people who demonstrate in front of abortion clinics now demonstrating in front of those justices homes?
That's a real question, by the way. I sort of expected them to be doing that by now. Is it simply that the left has more of an infrastructure to organize these events and more storm troopers who will carry out the assignment? Or, is the right just too polite for it's own good?
This makes perfect sense if you ever read the posts on Reddit's r/twoxchromosomes, a sub-reddit 'devoted to a woman's point of view'. 13 million members.
There are girls/women who are going back to school now because they are afraid women are going to be forbidden to get a college degree. There are girls/women who think state borders will be shut down to all women - no woman shall cross! There are girls/women who think the right to vote will be taken away in addition to access to bank accounts. They absolutely believe the Handmaid's Tale story is coming to pass. Some women want to leave the U.S. with their young daughters as 'they fear for their future'.
Some people yearn for drama - and the RvW thing has handed much drama to these girls/women.
Some of us are old enough to remember when it was a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad thing to say, "... extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! ... moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"
WHY aren't they in their offices writing new laws?? Isn't THAT their job??
==========
I am informed [and I believe] that lobbyists write laws - not Congress Critters.
so where are the $$$$$$$ lobbyists for killing babies for parts? [even if they are working behind scene]
what is the end game for these protests?
resignations by Justices?
new appointments to revisit rulings?
or just till 11/2022 elections? hmmmm
Their assassinations is the endgame. Keep the public agitation against them going long enough to induce a mentally ill person to shoot them in a restaurant.
Are there States that prohibit elective abortion? It seems that every State has a Roe-type law, where they vary in the age or circumstance of viability. The most strict laws set viability to where baby meets granny around six weeks. That said, there is no mystery in sex and conception. We take baby steps to abort human rites ("witch trials", "warlock judgments") performed for social, redistributive, clinical, political, and fair weather causes, the wicked solution.
These demonstrations are a clear violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1507.
Anyone who questions DOC/FBI corruption need look no further than this newest example of the double standard for arrest and prosecution compared to the January 6th travesty.
The most egregious among the Democrat's endless sins may well be the corruption of law enforcement and prosecution.
Quayle said...
Can one of your smarter folks here explain to me the reason for mass demonstrations in a democracy? Publicity for a cause, I get. But demonstration against oppression?
Ha! Yes! I have always wondered why people say that protests are democratic, or "this is what democracy looks like!" when they are protesting.
Freedom of speech? Sure! Freedom of assembly? Sure.
But it has nothing to do with democracy. I agree with gilbar that they are often trying to be un-democratic. They are trying to use mob rule to force people to bow to their wishes.
Demonstrators take strong exception to the reactions, saying that to whatever extent they disrupt tranquility, it is part of a much more important message...As they chanted recently: “Out of your houses and into the streets!”
This is the political class that in the 60s burned down cities to send a message. They've done the same thing with the riots and looting and blockades of traffic in the past few years -- protesting something or other by making innocent people suffer.
What exactly is the purpose of this disruptive cosplay in targeted neighborhoods? What outcome is this furthering?
SCOTUS will not reverse itself. The battleground for what demonstrators want is the states where abortion rights are an open question, not the Supreme Court. The protesters are simply making the public weary of the whole subject.
Is it legal to protest outside justices’ homes? The law suggests no
You see? There is a law Title 18, Section 1507 of the U.S. Code, which was enacted in 1950. Under this law, it is illegal to picket or parade in front of a courthouse or a judge’s home "with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge."
Sneaky lawyer counter - as the decision has already been rendered, the current batch of protesters are not picketing with the intent to interfere with, obstruct, etc., or influence a judge - that ship has already sailed.
Whether the protests violate Section 1507 presents some interesting First Amendment issues, among them whether Roe (or Dobbs) was essentially a political act (and thus appropriately protested by political means) as the Dobbs majority says of Roe and the Dobbs dissenters say of the Dobbs majority; whether Section 1507 would violate the First Amendment right to "petition the Government for redress of grievances" if it were applied to criminalize these protestors; and whether the protesters subjectively intend to influence judicial action (hard to believe anyone thinks these protests will actually do that, but maybe).
More to the point is the power of the states to impose reasonable time, place and manner limitations on the protests. The states' power to do that, consistent with First Amendment principles, is well settled. Given that the protests are occurring in residential neighborhoods, and are clearly disruptive (as they are also clearly intended to be), that strikes me as the better way for law enforcement to handle it.
A few observations after reading these mostly excellent comments:
The Leftist politicos at these demonstrations are doing us a favor. We're better off with their version of performative art in the street than them actually, well, legislating.
My old man, a decent bloke and blue collar guy, had it right when he remarked about the various protestors of 50 years ago "If the cameras weren't there, they wouldn't be there either."
This ilk of Leftist seems to know only one emotion: rage. From this springs the self-righteousness, the intolerance, the grandiosity that pervades these spectacles.
It's not like Brett "I like beer" Kavanaugh is operating a planned Parenthood clinic, then aggressive shaming protests are okeydoke
@Owen
"This situation cries out for a manure spreader."
Yes. Make them live up to the 'nasty woman' moniker. Make them live up to it covered in and smelling like shit. Make sure you don't forget Rosie Odonnell's house.
"Last Wednesday, officers indicated protesters were edging closer to being arrested."
How many trimesters of blatant criminality are they allowed?
"The most egregious among the Democrat's endless sins may well be the corruption of law enforcement..."
The police are just following orders.
My old man, a decent bloke and blue collar guy, had it right when he remarked about the various protestors of 50 years ago "If the cameras weren't there, they wouldn't be there either."
You point a camera at Antifa and other leftists, they will attack you. They do NOT want there to be visual evidence.
Republicans need to start hiring protestors. Start a non profit protest organizations that protests around the clock.
Blogger Howard said...
It's not like Brett "I like beer" Kavanaugh is operating a planned Parenthood clinic, then aggressive shaming protests are okeydoke
I think you misspelled "pregnancy Center" Instead of "shaming" you pals are burning them down. I guess that's a form of "shaming."
Not being able to protest on residential streets seems like a possibly reasonable limitation.
Neighbors, you want the cops involved leave your bloody houses and go provoke the biggest thug in the so-called protest (probably a woman). Action is sure to follow.
I have been involved in many protests in my day. The majority were very successful in bringing attention to a variety of issues. This is what democracy is all about and why I love this country!! However, there is a time and place for everything. The protests were always conducted in public places i.e. steps of City Hall, outside businesses, parades with permits, etc... At no time were sidewalks blocked, streets obstructed, or noise ordinances violated. I am appalled that these protestors would think it ok to invade a person's private residence and disrupt an entire neighborhood. What if there were sick people attempting to recover, infants trying to sleep, night shift workers resting during the day, frightened elderly living alone, etc... The selfishness on the part of these protestors is truly mind boggling!! They should try a little civility instead. It works!
“We already have our rights being taken away,” said Sadie Kuhns, 28, who has been a liaison for the abortion rights advocates in conversations with police each week
Really? What State does she live in?
Their assassinations is the endgame. Keep the public agitation against them going long enough to induce a mentally ill person to shoot them in a restaurant.
I think that Pelosi's intent. It why she held up the bill to protect the Justices as long as she did. She's starting to run out of time though. I don't think the idiot wing of the party can think that far ahead though.
Howard hates guys who drink beer. Because of course he does.
Sorry Howard. Most dudes don't take drink cues from Sex and the City reruns like you do.
Cope.
Dude1394: "Republicans need to start hiring protestors. Start a non profit protest organizations that protests around the clock."
They would immediately be arrested by the Democratical FBI, prosecuted by our Stasi DOJ before a 100% partisan Dem DC star chamber "jury", and then sent away for years.
This illustrates what's wrong with the Supreme Court DECLARING that certain "rights" exist. When the Court reverses itself, people (you could say, simple-minded people, but that's most of us) say, You've taken away our rights! The truth is, that 50 years ago the Court CREATED certain "rights", and now the Court is saying, OOPS, we are changing our collective mind, and that was never a right.
The Godfather said...
This illustrates what's wrong with the Supreme Court DECLARING that certain "rights" exist. When the Court reverses itself, people (you could say, simple-minded people, but that's most of us) say, You've taken away our rights! The truth is, that 50 years ago the Court CREATED certain "rights", and now the Court is saying, OOPS, we are changing our collective mind, and that was never a right."
Thats the problem with the progressive Nimrods. They don't get that what a legislature or court gives in terms of rights, it can take.
That is why natural rights are so important, they aren't given so they can't be in an honest republic taken. Better to be a citizen that a subject.
I can't where see harassing Supreme Court justices in their homes, in restaurants, wherever they can be hunted down, is a more effective tool for meaningful change than lobbying legislators or trying to get candidates elected to the state legislature (or Congress) who share your point of view and might work to pass laws to codify the right to abortion.
This question has been on my mind since the leak of the draft opinion. Clearly all the outrage, protests, harassment, heck even acts of violence against property, not to mention the beginnings of an assassination attempt, and so on did *not* change anything. So what is the point?
I can only think of one broad answer. Punishment/revenge. "We're upset, and we want you to suffer". Or "if abortions aren't safe, then neither are you". Oh.
Post a Comment