"... in the wake of a deadly school shooting in Nashville. Republican leaders argued that the two lawmakers and Representative Gloria Johnson, who joined the protest but survived an expulsion vote, had brought 'disorder and dishonor to the House of Representatives.' Critics said that the expulsions were an overreaction that defied the will of the voters who had elected Mr. Jones and Mr. Pearson in Nashville and Memphis, the state’s two largest cities, which also have large Black and Democratic-leaning populations. Democratic lawmakers and activists also warned that the expulsions could have dangerous repercussions, including encouraging lawmakers in Tennessee and other states controlled by a single party to use the measure as a tool for silencing dissenting voices."
What a bad mistake by Republicans! Did they not foresee this backlash? It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech.
We've been talking a lot lately about the problem of speakers shouting down speakers. Some of us — and I am not one of them — have become overly righteous about preserving the forum of the official speaker on any given occasion.
We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech. It's not easy to deal with the colliding issues, and some remedies are needed, but don't pick the most aggressive solution!
Posts
141 comments:
Bad republicans - bad.
Only democrats are allowed to act like bullies.
It’s 2023. The democrat party has become a fucking junta tracking down and destroying and killing anybody that gets in their way.
There’s gonna be a civil war ma’am. This is a very minor skirmish at the edges. Republican administrations everywhere should use every available opportunity to kick the shit out of democrats. It’s called fighting back. Fuck them. Go back and expel her too.
No civility bullshit. Let’s duke it out in all theaters.
Another weekend, another call for the GOP to bring back civility.
I thought we were supposed to enjoy things being boring.
The Dems started the "insurrection" bs. This is the inevitable response. But it was stupid to leave out the white insurrectionist.
Oh, so leading chats with bullhorns on the House floor is now “protected speech”, but walk into the Capitol and get years in jail? Push back twice as hard! It’s called the normie’s backlash time.
Their "rules" permit them anything, deny us everything. So ridiculous. Let the clowns experience a tiny bit of consequence for once. They can drop deaf for all I care.
We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech.
please tell this, to the Jan 6th political prisoners
You can't burn a bridge twice. So there's no use fretting about burning bridges. Gloves are off. The most aggressive solution was transvestites killing christian kids and teachers, expelling some 'insurrectionists' doesn't even come close.
It's for the form of the dissent, not the dissent. They can say anything they want in the regular way.
Perhaps you have become overly righteous about the right of protestors to disrupt "official speakers" and official proceedings.
The Tennessee riots are intrinsically the same quality of offense as the January 6th riots. Why treat them differently? Why insist on differential treatment of individuals based on their race or age? These young Black men are no different than the Q Anon shaman and deserve the same treatment.
I believe in equal treatment under the law -- the alternative advocated by Mr. Jones and Mr. Pearson's defenders is Apartheid.
The people have the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. They can't do that if the government itself is petitioning.
Utter nonsense from the professor. People should not be able to hijack official proceedings to scream and intimidate just because they feel justified in doing so. Does the professor really want the right to emulate the left in this matter? That's what is going to happen.
We are not going to tolerate heckler's vetoes and violation of whatever established, codified rules of conduct the left feels like violating today in raw power grabs with no consequences ever for much longer. If I can take over a proceeding with no legitimacy to do so, I have declared that I am above the rules established by liberal society for resolving disputes by words instead of violence. The choices are enforce the rules, or the right systematizes breaking them whenever it wants to as the left has. Your rights don't matter, the rules don't matter, shut up and take it as I do what I want. That road ends in violence. Do you really wanna go down it?
Geez. I remember when the proof of character in civil disturbance was accepting the consequences. Guess that's right out the window when you commandeer a body and use a bullhorn to drown out the proceedings and then promptly cry about "free speech". No self awareness or principles involved.
Let's see here. A majority of democratically elected representatives vote to oust two representatives who blatantly violated the rules adopted through majority vote of the people's representatives. Doesn't sound undemocratic to me.
Imagine this happened on the floor of the US House when Pelosi was Speaker, but with a few Republicans doing the bullhorn thing. Front page issue with calls for the same action.
Wow never saw this Althouse reaction to the absolutely disgusting and cruel treatment for the unfortunate tourists swept up in J6 fervor. These two imprudent young lawmakers can and will run again. The people still being held two years later in dank DC jails have not been able to get their lives back.
Where is the civility bullshit tag?
A former president was just indicted on numerous phony charges, and yesterday, a big story came out trying to undermine a Supreme Court justice. The FBI and Capitol Police encouraged a mob on January 6th, and some of those were denied bail or kept in solitary confinement.
This is how it works now. The "We have a tradition..." falls upon deaf ears.
Amazing how dealing with, fighting against Antifa/brwonshirt type tactics from the left is -"an outrage!"
We still suffer a complete un-indicted crook (+ brother and son) as president.
Jeffrey Epstein's sex-island escape for elites? = washed clean by the hack-D press.
and the corrupt FBI.
But - outrage! GOP outrage! Such outrage! How dare they! optics! they are black! Don't those stupid GOPers understand optics! Free speech is for leftist bullies and their bullhorns. The rest of you - shut up.
And institutions, public and private—such as universities—may well set up their own rules, forbidding this second kind of heckler's veto. If imposed and enforced in a neutral way, those rules don't violate the First Amendment or, I think, academic freedom principles. There is no right to interrupt a speaker who has been invited to give a speech in a way that keeps him from being heard, just as partisans of that speaker have no right to interrupt a speaker from the opposite side.
https://reason.com/volokh/2022/03/25/hecklers-veto-two-related-meanings/
In general, the core concern with the heckler’s veto is that allowing the suppression of speech because of the discontent of the opponents provides the perverse incentive for opponents to threaten violence rather than to meet ideas with more speech. Thus the Supreme Court has tended to protect the rights of speakers against such opposition in these cases, effectively finding hecklers’ vetoes inconsistent with the First Amendment.
https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/968/heckler-s-veto
Leading a protest in the chamber where there are strict rules on how debate proceeds is not that same thing asserting to speak on a street corner. This is not a "free speech" issue, if it were then any limit on timing and structure of legislative debate would be considered an breach of free speech rights. A chamber has rules precisely to prevent chaos on the floor. That said, I'd have censured them and made a mockery of them, but I would never have martyred them. The problem is, the average human is so stupid few can see more than ten minutes ahead .. and the average state legislator is dumber than the average citizen.
It's a fine blog post by you, Althouse.
Best of luck to you in working it out with your other commenters.
Some insurrections are more equal than others.
They were incitng a riot. We were told that is wrong. And that it is wrong to do while their congress is in session.
This is the exact same law that the doj is using against the j6 protestors. Obstruction of an official proceeding. I am ecstatic that the republicans did this. More please and faster.
As someone said hit back twice as hard. I don’t recall anyone getting the vapors over that.
"It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly"
Plainly undemocratic? Hardly,
Since the expelling process followed the TN constitution (Art. II, section 12), these expulsions were ipso facto democratic.
All TN lawmakers, included the ousted ones, took an oath to that constitution (Art. X, section 2).
Remember the quintessntial American believes in tarring and feathering that Stamp Tax collector, and the tax collector can sqawk all he wants to while they are pouring on the tar and scraping the mess off later.
Personally, I believe in ordered liberty. Everyone can talk, and no one is compelled to listen. I think they have rules in the Tennessee state legislature about proper decorum. I bet your classroom would be different today, particularly given the the fact of comment section on this blog...or maybe you would just give up on decorum.
A bullhorn at the podium leading the gallery in chants is a bit much. Punching out Reilly Gaines at SFSU also seems extreme. Where do we stop?
This was not protesting a speaker with speech, this was disruption of an official proceeding by outsiders, with the collusion and encouragement of members of the body.
The Party of Chaos strikes again, with mobs of childish freaks.
So shall we allow all government processes to be stopped by mobs with megaphone interrupting proceedings?
Should a defense counsel of a clearly losing case be allowed to stop court proceedings by leading protestors on a chant from the bench?
It seems to me that punishing the representatives clearly falls within the purview of that legislature. They did not punish the protestors exercising their 1st amendment rights. There are rules the legislature had, it looks like some members violated those rules, the consequences were executed also according to the rules. Where is the first amendment violation?
Tennessee legislature is right .AA is wrong.Listened to interview with Tennessee HouseSpeaker.All three legislators plotted and conspired to do exactly what Ds did on J6.Then the insensitive VP doubled down on the assassin's praise.What's society you wish for.
"It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech. "
Yes, if that had been the reason they were expelled it would be "undemocratic". However, it wasn't "for the offense of speech". The three helped lead the protesters into the chambers, took over the proceedings, and spoke with bullhorns in the well without being recognized by Chair to speak. If the three had simply been speaking on the issue after being recognized by the Chair, there would not have been a problem with their words. So they were NOT expelled due to speech.
Sure(wink wink) a Bullhorn
Rep. Paul Sherrell, R-Sparta, made the suggestion during a Criminal Justice Committee meeting Tuesday while lawmakers discussed HB1245 and an amendment to the bill that would allow for death by firing squad as an execution method in Tennessee.
"I was just wondering, could I put an amendment on that that would include hanging by a tree, also," Sherrell asked during the meeting.
He then offered to sign on as a co-sponsor to the bill.
'Nothing surprises me': Tennessee Black Caucus chairman on 'hanging by tree' suggestion
Tennessee, like much of the South, has a traumatic history with hangings and particularly lynchings, which often took place publicly and without due process for the victim. Tennessee had 236 documented lynchings between 1877 and 1950, there were likely more unreported cases, according to the Equal Justice Initiative. C'mon man, call it what it is.
What a bad mistake by Republicans! Did they not foresee this backlash?
@Althouse, We. Do. Not. Care. About. The. Backlash. (Such as it is.) The two — and it should have been all three — were engaging in speech, all right, but it was speech encouraging violence and rioting. Thou shalt not yell “Fire” in a crowded theater and all that.
The people who are lashing back yesterday and this morning, including yourself, are not persuadable voters. There is nothing — short of screwing over our base and becoming Democrat Lite (e.g., Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell) — that is going to persuade any of you to vote Republican in November of next year. So the expulsion cost us no votes, or next to none. But for every person who is loudly and proudly fulminating over the right of Democrats to foment violence, there are at least two voters who are quietly nodding their head and thinking that it’s about time someone pushed back.
"What a bad mistake by Republicans!"
Ah, yes. Bad, bad GOP.
"Did they not foresee this backlash?"
As opposed to Dems, who don't have to worry about backlash. Did middle America lash back at the J6 political persecutions?
"It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech>"
The offense was insurrection--i.e., the thwarting of democracy.
But the GOP is stuck: it should play hardball right back to satisfy he base and make the fight fair, but it should also take into account the feelings of nice women who can make the difference in elections.
TENNESSEE legislature expelled the members for their actions that were in violation of the rules of the Tennessee Legislature - not the entire Republican party. Not even the Tennessee Republican Party. I see this as "states rights" in action. If the two lawmakers are reappointed, then that is also "states rights" in action. Then you either have a stand-off or the two parties can negotiate a settlement like adults.
I object to "speech" being called "violence" when one party does it and "violence" being called "speech" when the other party does it.
When the invited speaker is sucker punched during the speech and needs more than a dozen police officers to get safely out of the facility, then "speech" has been abused and there should be consequences to, at minimum, the person who assaulted the speaker. When a dissenter shouts down or assaults no one, then 11 months in solitary and a multi-year sentence is an abuse of their speech rights.
The "extremists" on both ends of the political spectrum are creating more extremists by their actions. Why? My cynicism says because it is lucrative for them to not attempt to resolve the issues.
Were these consequences based on the message or the conduct used to convey the message? Content-neutral restrictions are allowed. Time, place and manner restrictions are not just civility bullshit. There're consequences to coming into a government building with a bullhorn and acting the asshole. J6 defendants can tell everyone that. But maybe it's a cultural thing for these activists and they should get a pass because they're unable to follow rules? Or leftist/Marxist privilege allows them to act any way they want to? That's not righteousness. It just dumbing down any standard and making excuses for shit-kid college leftists at prestigiuos universities and tiktok legislators who thrive with anarchy.
If they want back in the legislature should say "sue us."
Bullhorn is not "speech," any more than running a leaf-blower or repeatedly drowning out the proceedings with an air-horn is "speech."
So people breaking into your bedroom and protesting while your trying to have sex is a good thing?
How can you tell when non-violent raucous protestors will turn into a mob?
Riley Gaines was in that situation this week. She gave a speech at San Francisco State in front of peaceful protestors. She had a civil Q & A with them.
On her way out, she was physically attacked and had to barricade herself in a room for three hours.
Parker Posey was similarly assaulted in New Zealand.
Chris the Billboard guy had a Transgender screaming "Fuck you" in his face for several minutes and was then slammed to the ground by that person as the police watched.
The Wisconsin protests were an eye opener. "This is what democracy looks like!" chant people who had just lost an election. Feingold shouts "It's not over until we win!" Either they don't mean what they are saying (call it "incivility bullshit") or they do and it's a dark omen of what's to come.
The Left does theater well. There were people beating on the doors of the Supreme Court after Kavanaugh's confirmation. Climate protestors "stormed" Democrats' offices in 2018. These events were orchestrated and had little chance of becoming violent.
Two years later a man tries to assassinate Kavanaugh; pregnancy care centers are firebombed and graffitied. J6 protestors, having watched Leftist theater for years, storm the Capitol.
Incivility Bullshit is cosplay; the problem is when the people in the audience buy the act and think it's real.
Interrupting official proceedings is what some of the J6 defendants have been charged with. It is different for Dems. FAFO is party specific.
It’s gonna be tough, not coming here everyday for the Althouse Take on the stories of the day. But not as tough as it would be to continue coming here for this kind of malarkey. All good things…
---What a bad mistake by Republicans! Did they not foresee this backlash? It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech.
---We've been talking a lot lately about the problem of speakers shouting down speakers. Some of us — and I am not one of them — have become overly righteous about preserving the forum of the official speaker on any given occasion. [AA]
These two statements make no sense to me. In the first, this case is not about speech, it is ALSO about preventing speech and taking over the Legislature.
In the second, your defense of the destructives was not opposed by the "overly righteous." It was opposed by damn near everybody because it was so egregiously totalitarian.
Correction: we used to have a tradition of respectful peaceful protests but leftists ruined it by burning everything down in 2020 to honor George Floyd, which is apparently a higher calling than upholding the rule of law according to a prominent retired lawprof. Then to further emphasize their fascist intent the Uniparty in DC not only criminalized dissent with the J6 pogrom but attempted to railroad the protesters by charging the capital offense of insurrection.
Just for protesting peacefully and respectfully. That’s what happened to your beloved tradition Althouse.
You don’t get to go back. There is no tolerable amount of insurrection we should accept. Those are your cruelly neutral rules. But they don’t apply to one side. That you don’t acknowledge the fundamental unfairness of this double standard is truly disappointing. But we should have known when you emphasized that the DEI dean and students had the right to be heard overruling the event and the planning and the safety of the actual invited speaker.
And what are you prepared to do if such demonstrations on the House floor become the norm? Like it or not, decorum has a place in such institutions. The rules of the Tennessee House explicitly bar such activity on the House floor.
It wasn't speech, it was takeover of the chamber and gallery in a coordinated manner, with the 3 legislators assisting the takeover. We'vebeen told that deserves no bail jail for 2 years, and harsh prison sentences for unlawful parading. Are you just surprised this was done to a non-Rethuglican?
We have a tradition of protest in America
I don't recall any town meetings degenerating into protests with bull horns wielded by the town officers. Debate, sure, but reasoned debate. These days many folks are afraid to voice their opinions because of organized left wing protest mobs. Screw that.
Bad behavior by Democrats - and the story is always the response by Republicans.
Are ANY Democrats actually principled?
Is disrupting an official proceeding allowable, or a crime punishable by up to 20 years in prison?
Or are we now a nation where Democrats have gone back to their old Jim Crow ways and unequal justice against their political opponents is now once again accepted?
It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech.
So, now all insurrections aren't created equal?
It wasn't about their speech. They were expelled for violations of decorum. They joined a group of "insurrectionists" who forcibly entered the chambers, which made the legislature shut down. They then joined the "insurrectionists" by marching arm in arm among them. At least one of the legislators was filmed berating his fellow legislators by yelling through a bullhorn at them. It was all in all an ugly scene.
Everyone's acting as if the legislators were booted out for joining in the protests on the Capitol steps or sumthin'. That's not what went down.
The other side indicted Trump. It's tit for tat.
Their rules.
The abortion debate is coming to Nebraska next week. I predict that the Nebraska Jacobins (Hunt, M. Cavanaugh and Conrad) will do something similar. They will bring a bullhorn to the floor of the Unicameral and start leading chants in the gallery.
You saw it here first.
Politics has become a contact sport, with rules like “Calvin Ball”. Through the years we’ve had spirited legislative debate, but there was always a Presiding Officer, or Sergeant at Arms, to control things. Now, more and more, the debate is not about doing the people’s business but has become laced with personal taunts. Legislative jibes have always been there but members have generally been able to set them aside when the debate is over.
We need to revisit Don Corleone’s thought that “It’s business, not personal.” Lately it’s gotten more personal.
In Tennessee the straw that broke the camels back was using a bullhorn to lead protesters in chants. As Jonathan Turley said, “Nothing says deliberative debate like a bullhorn.” Imagine if on 1/6 a member of Congress had brought a bullhorn to the House floor and led the rioters in chants.
I think Tennessee did the right thing because you just have to stop the car sometimes.
Can't you see how plainly undemocratic it was to disrupt the process of democracy?
Not my state. But at least they're doing something. The 2 expelled are radical, black, 'revolutionary' types. Grifters both.
The ship is going down; might as well take some prizes on the way...
Odd. It seems like the same tactic taken by the Democrats and RINO Never-Trumpers in attacking Trump as responsible for the J6 riot. That broad interpretation of obstruction that the Appellate Court is taking ... where any protest or act of civil disobedience becomes obstruction of an official proceeding.
Odd. It seems like the same tactic taken by the Democrats and RINO Never-Trumpers in attacking Trump as responsible for the J6 riot. That broad interpretation of obstruction that the Appellate Court is taking ... where any protest or act of civil disobedience becomes obstruction of an official proceeding.
The one who was not expelled admitted she violated the rules. The other two did not and the vote reflected that, I suppose.
Althouse, moderation Althouse, is here extolling the virtues of unmoderated speech.
I don't know.
Democrats have imprisoned J6 protestors, many who were merely attending a protest, and speaking, and who were invited to enter our public buildings.
They've been arrested, convicted and jailed ... for the "crime" of "parading."
Did Democrats not foresee backlash?
One party has always cared about backlash and the other does not. That is changing. Mainly because we know your faux outrage is performance art.
Republicans are going to exercise POWER in every way they can, against the enemies of the United States of America - the Democrat Party - and we don't give a shit if you backlash.
Fight inflammatory, divisive, targeted mob-action speech with fire. Fuck ‘em.
1. It plays to the base.
2. It feels good, like indicting Trump.
Neither side holds the answer, and there is no solution. Only tradeoffs.
Glenn Reynolds is not wrong when he says this is the worst political class in the history of the republic.
Is this worse than Nancy Pelosi banning Jim Jordan and Jim Banks from serving on the J6 committee or removing all the committee assignments from Marjorie Taylor Greene? Or how about the attempt by Democrats to ban Republican House members from serving in congress for “treason” because they took part in the “insurrection” by not voting to approve the electoral college results?
I thought speech was one thing, and disruption of speech was another?
I thought disruption of speech in a public commons like a park or street (where the speech was not part of official business of the duly elected legislature) was one thing? And what happened in the TN legislature with bullhorns and orchestrated mob action menacing the other legislators, was another?
Silly me. The overriding consideration is intersectional victim-mongering.
Democrats can never do any wrong! Republicans are always wrong. Interrupt the electoral count of Democrat Joe Biden and go to jail. Interrupt the Tennessee legislature to protest gun rights and the insurrections become martyrs when the legislature holds them accountable for their actions.
Being a Black American is an automatic get-out-of-jail free card. Good to know. Not racist at all.
Like it or not, the fact that the white lady was allowed to stay sure reinforces the impression many have of GOP and race.
The smarter thing would have been to censure them with a warning that if they did it again, then expulsion.
The majority should have anticipated the race angle.
Anything short of [elective] abortion(s), toxic remedies and own goals, and over two years... 12 trimesters of denying civil and human rights nationwide.
The "protest" was about transgenders as the shooting in Nashville has been converted by the left into an "innocent" tranny being shot down by big bad "authorities." That is why the "Manifesto" will not be released. The averted shooting in Colorado will also become a hymn of praise for the "poor victim" of transphobes. That loony apparently has a "manifesto" as well, but I doubt it will be released. The left is getting increasingly violent after a lull for the 2020 "election." "Gun control" is for the middle aged suburban white women who cheer this on while not having a clue about what is going on. Riley Gaines found out when the white guy in a dress punched her.
I routinely watch ABC News Tonight. I don't do this to stay informed but rather to see how our betters wish the public to be informed. ABC News informed their watchers that the two Black offenders were expelled but the white female was allowed to keep her position. The news also told us that the some efforts were being made to ban abortion pills....ABC News did not draw any parallels between the 1/6 events and the protests in Tn.....This will cost the Republicans votes. The optics of keeping the white members and expelling the Blacks was an unforced error. So is the attempt to ban abortion pills. Well, perhaps with benefit of his added years and experience, Biden's second term will be more fruitful.
Seemingly, these legislators got off easy, didn't they, compared to the federal Jan 6 defendants?
And it wasn't just "speech," but "interrupting debate last week by using a bullhorn to lead a gun control protest in the chamber..."
The charge of obstruction of an official proceeding, which carries up to 20 years behind bars, is among the most widely used felony charges in the Jan. 6 cases. It has been brought against people accused of plotting to stop the transfer of presidential power from Republican Donald Trump to Democrat Joe Biden as well as in dozens of less serious cases.
Dozens of people have already pleaded guilty to the charge or been convicted at trial.
The Justice Department has argued that the offense — punishing anyone who "corruptly" obstructs or impedes an "official proceeding" — clearly fits the conduct of the rioters who halted Congress' certification of Biden's 2020 election victory.
But U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols found that prosecutors stretched the law beyond its scope to inappropriately apply it in the these cases. Nichols ruled that a defendant must have taken "some action with respect to a document, record, or other object" in order to obstruct an official proceeding under the law.
The Justice Department appealed, arguing that Nichols' interpretation of the law was too limited.
In her appeals court ruling, Judge Florence Pan noted that Nichols — an appointee of Trump — was the only lower court judge overseeing Jan. 6 cases to rule that way; every other judge who considered it said that it was correctly used.
"Although the opinions of those district judges are not binding on us, the near unanimity of the rulings is striking, as well as the thorough and persuasive reasoning in the decision," wrote Pan, who was appointed by Biden.
Circuit Appeals Judge Gregory Katsas, however, sided with Nichols, writing that prosecutors' interpretation of the law was overly broad, especially for a crime that carries such a long potential sentence.
The law has been on the books for two decades and used thousands of times, but until the Jan. 6 prosecutions it had been used only against people accused of damaging or impairing evidence, the Trump appointee wrote.
If the charge covers anything that "obstructs, influences, or impedes an official proceeding," it could also potentially criminalize other common ways that people try to convince lawmakers of their point of view, including advocacy, lobbying, or protesting, he wrote.
"So while this approach would create an escape hatch for those who influence an official proceeding without committing any other crime, it also would supercharge a range of minor advocacy, lobbying, and protest offenses into 20-year felonies," Katsas wrote.
The appeals court's ruling suggests more legal wrangling over the law is likely. While he sided with Pan in reversing Nichols' decision, Judge Justin Walker said the court was wrong to not address what the law means by "corruptly."
Walker, another Trump appointee, said "corruptly" means defendants are guilty only if they act to "procure an unlawful benefit" for themselves or someone else. He used the example of a rioter who joined the riot because "he was angry at the nation's elites" and saw it as an "opportunity to display his bravado."
"Though likely guilty of other crimes, he did not act 'corruptly'" under the law "because he did not intend to procure a benefit by obstructing the Electoral College vote count," he wrote.
"That rioter may not be representative of most rioters on Jan. 6. But in every case, the government will need to prove at trial whether each defendant acted 'corruptly' in a way that my hypothetical rioter did not," he wrote.
Violate the established rule, kicked out of the club. Whatever. Reappointed? Change the tire again.
Hmm-- an actual breech of the chamber's rules vs. imaginary and non-existent crimes that were used for impeachment.
I have no problem.
We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech. It's not easy to deal with the colliding issues, and some remedies are needed, but don't pick the most aggressive solution!
Now do J6.
They interrupted proceedings and broke the rules. It was January 6th, but if Republican Congress folk joined the protestors.
What a bad mistake by Republicans!
There was a one-vote difference.
At best it’s a bad mistake by one Republican, and not at all indicative of the party as a whole.
The dems are rapidly pushing for mob rule. It is not "speech".
We had such a tradition. Had.
"We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech."
That "toleration" is only for the left's antics. Everybody knows this.
You are not going to like the results of your position. In fact, what the Tennesee Republicans did here is a direct application of what you, and the clowns weilding bullhorns in the Legislature, subscribe to: Might Makes Right.
You want them to behave differently? Make them. This way leads to chaos, but the Tennessee Republicans didn't start the fight.
Sort of like this:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=w9KBOhPXhds
"We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech. It's not easy to deal with the colliding issues, and some remedies are needed, but don't pick the most aggressive solution!"
You can protest outside the chamber... you can protest with signs inside the chamber.. but bullhorns??? That violates the decorum of the chamber.
Kick the bastards out. They knew the rules. There are limits to protest.
I thought “insurrection” was a bad thing? And here were these Democrat representatives inviting protestors onto the floor and inciting them with a bullhorn. Goose, gander.
They were fomenting an insurrection, for which they are now consequences. The only mistake the expellers made was not expelling all three.
Yes, Republicans must endlessly allow the left to walk all over them, because opposing their fascism might make them look back in the eyes of the fascist media corporations and Soros minions. We have become a nation of craven jackasses. See how Cruelly Neutral I am?
What is the solution to unacceptable behavior? Other than just letting one side get away with it forever?
Disrupting state house business with a bullhorn qualifies for expulsion.
Those districts can send two more idiots to the state house but those idiots need to have manners.
This 60s style disruption is bullshit and needs to end. Expel students who disrupt. Fire teachers and administrators who disrupt or allow students to. And get rid of legislators who do it.
These three people have a wide range of ways to be heard and legitimately represent their constituents. But instead of availing themselves of an eagerly left-wing media waiting in the hallway, or writing their own legislation or op-ed, or speaking properly during the time limits provided to every legislator, or joining protesters outside the chamber, they violated the rules they swore to uphold.
In doing so, they deprived other legislators of the chance to legitimately represent their constituents. Politics isn't kindergarten, nor is law school, and I cannot understand why you seem so hell-bent on destroying these institutions while simultaneously presenting as a professor who would not tolerate such destructive childishness from her own students. Maybe that impression is false. Did you let your students shout each other down, shout you down, use bull horns to silence others, throw chairs and chase speakers into hiding, screech that certain people should be raped, etc?
I spent decades at a state legislature. All people have the right to protest, so long as they don't prevent others from participating in the political process. In the chambers, however, only legislators may speak, and only in a civilized, orderly fashion. I saw a lot of ugly stuff, but never this anarchist sort of temper tantrum. It is not speech: it is disruption.
The rules are there because the stakes are high, as they are in courtrooms.
The R's would hold a better hand if they also would have given the boot to the white? he/she? woman.
It was probably an overreaction.
But the tactic of shouting down speech you don’t agree with is the antithesis of free speech. And one used overwhelmingly by the left.
We do not have a great tradition of screaming so loud speech can’t be heard. We have a tradition of inviting debate. This isn’t a civility is bullshit issue, it’s a free speech issue.
Althouse: "It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech."
Perhaps un Democratic, but not un democratic - and the offense was not speech, it was breach of contract.
The explusion decision was democatically arrived at, by a democratically elected body. Not undemocratic; unDemocratic only in the sense that the expulsees are members of the self-designated Democratic Party.
The offense was breach of the Legislators' rules of decorum which the expulsees had agreed to honor and uphold.
========
Althouse would have it that the loudest, most obnoxious, most impolite, most unruly participant wins. Bring a louder bullhorn? No problem. Equip your side with noise-cancelling headphones and bring eardrum damaging noisemakers? No problem.
Next step, obstruct passage of fellow Legislators on the floor. No problem. Obstruct entrance of fellow Legislators to the Assembly Room (shades of Pride's Purge). No problem. Caning of fellow Legislators (Brooks v. Sumner). No problem for Althouse.
========
"We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech. It's not easy to deal with the colliding issues, and some remedies are needed, but don't pick the most aggressive solution!"
We do have a treasured right of protest in America (yes, I did twist your words there) but your "most aggressive solution" is a straw man.
How is a megaphone different than whistles shouting down conservative voices at a university?
This is nothing but a 4 year old having a temper tantrum. They need to grow up.
The Stupid Party rides again!
A censure vote would have been adequate.
Don't bring a bullhorn to a gunfight.
The Republicans took all that "Sacred Temple of Democracy" talk too seriously?
The most important part about making a move like this is having the backbone to tell people to F*ck off, f*ck straight off and stay there. We would hear no such protests being raised if the roles were reversed here. And it's likely the Republicans will be the squirrels they always are, and back off, chattering away, caving right in to the accusations of 'Yuh Raciss'.
The visuals, certainly as broadcast, are poor. The context of the actual affront is missing on many sites. But are we arguing over what happened and how to handle it from a right vs wrong point of view. Or is all that matters how it affects the polls?
(FWIW, I believe, stripping the committee positions, with caution for anyone doing such in future would face worse, was sufficient).
But Kamela is taking the pulpit route and blasting out the undemocratic label. Kind of like, "We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech."
Fair enough.
But Schummer presides over the senate. And Kamela breaks tie votes. Suppose some left wing issue is being discussed. Further suppose three Republican Senators stride, unbidden to the floor, bull horn in hand". The gallery chants like trained seals. Some 50 minutes pass before the three are removed.
Will either Schummer or Kamela tell us about the long, proud history of American protest?
Is the heckler's veto OK within the halls of congress? Do rules matter?
Or, as it seems, things like freedom of speech are subject to party and subject.
Yes, how did they not anticipate a backlash by the very people who call them fascists on a daily basis? Perhaps if they cowered harder they could turn this around!
If you shit on the altar during Mass, your ass is getting excommunicated.
It wasn’t speech. It was a raucus protest that disrupted official proceedings. Isn’t that the most common charge against Jan 6 defendants, most of whom did not even protest but merely stepped into the Capitol through open doors?
The elected officials vowed to stop all business in the legislature. Unacceptable for members of the legislature from inside the room. It’s free speech outside but rules inside,
What a bad mistake by Republicans! Did they not foresee this backlash? It is so plainly undemocratic to use the expulsion power so suddenly and crudely — and for the offense of speech.
Bullshit
The offense was leading an insurrection against the Tennessee House of Representatives.
Either that or all the Jan 6 prosecutions are "for the offense of speech."
When everyone charged with anything non-violent on Jan 6 is real;eased, their records expunged, and the Federal gov't pays them for their trouble, THEN you can talk about "for the offense of speech".
Until then? Get fucked
We've been talking a lot lately about the problem of speakers shouting down speakers. Some of us — and I am not one of them — have become overly righteous about preserving the forum of the official speaker on any given occasion.
We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech. It's not easy to deal with the colliding issues, and some remedies are needed, but don't pick the most aggressive solution!
1: "Toleration of disruptive speech" ended Jan 6, 2021
2: You do not have a free speech right to stop my speech. That's the heckler's vetos, and it's evil
3: We are absolutely going to do to your side what your side is doing to ours. See Jan 6.
Any leftist who attempts to use their speech to violate our free speech rights needs to be crushed like a bug.
Because if my free speech isn't important, than neither is yours
Is it speech or is it insurrection? Oh right, they are leftists, so it is "speech".
https://campusreform.org/article?id=21845
WATCH: 'When they want you silent, speak louder': Riley Gaines attacked at SF State
A mob of pro-trans protesters swarmed a Riley Gaines event hosted by Turning Point USA at San Francisco State University on Thursday evening, during which she was hit by a biologically male transgender protester.
That's your "disruptive protesters." What's eventually going to happen is one of two things:
1: Police stop them
2: Good people start shooting them
Pick
Who whom.
Always.
I see that my comment from a few hours ago--this morning actually--didn't make it through. I'm not sure why--maybe the Prof didn't need another observation on her lack of proportion and glib dismissal of what is appropriate and tolerable in a legislative body.
There was nothing legitimate about the outburst of those childish freaks, and the two expellees can stay out until they learn some manners.
The comments reloaded just after I complained about not seeing mine from earlier.
Complaint withdrawn, opinion maintained.
So if Hakeem Jeffries and AOC decided to halt House business with bullhorns and screaming, that's OK?
I agree that this was a major mistake by the Republicans. It was a massive overreaction that has come back to bite them in the ass. (And allow them to be painted as racists in the national media.) This should have been a simple reprimand or censure or something like that; not expulsion. They should admit their mistake and vote to undo this. (But they won't.)
I also read that the Nashville Council says that they will vote to reinstate their expelled member. I haven't read the rules about expulsion, but it shouldn't work that way. If a lawmaker is expelled from a legislature, you would think it would be for a set period of time. If they can just be voted right back in the next week, it would make these expulsions look even dumber.
And everyone comparing this to the Jan 6th riot.....two wrongs don't make a right. The Tennessee legislature could actually have made the point that the punishment against the Jan 6th rioters was excessive by not expelling the legislators who broke the rules. Punching back doesn't mean throwing your ethics out the window. Evander Holyfield didn't turn around and bite Mike Tyson's ear after Mike Tyson bit his...and Holyfield won that fight.
Blogger mccullough said...
Disrupting state house business with a bullhorn qualifies for expulsion.
…
I think it’s pretty fukkin’ funny, the way you sound so serious when you write something like that. It leaves te rest of us wondering whether you just didn’t know, or deliberately ignored the fact that Tennessee Republicans DIDN’T expel an admitted child abuser.
“It's a fine blog post by you, Althouse.
Best of luck to you in working it out with your other commenters.”
I appreciate Althouse’s courage these past few months. Maybe at long last the majority rightistcommenter’s extremism has gotten to be too much even for her, who is quite tolerant. Who knows, I’m only guessing, but I do see a different side of Althouse lately.
“It's a fine blog post by you, Althouse.
Best of luck to you in working it out with your other commenters.”
I appreciate Althouse’s courage these past few months. Maybe at long last the majority rightist commenter’s extremism has gotten to be too much even for her, who is quite tolerant. Who knows, I’m only guessing, but I do see a different side of Althouse lately.
What a bad mistake by Republicans!
Bullshit. The only 'mistake' they made was not expelling the white thug, too.
Rules for all or rules for none.
This is probably a good point to comment on Democrats threatening mob violence to try to convince Republicans to vote for gun control …
My comment: Asshole Democrats don’t understand normal people, do they?
"The smarter thing would have been to censure them with a warning that if they did it again, then expulsion.
The majority should have anticipated the race angle."
_____
I agree.
It's also striking how the shooter has vanished, along with any motives, as if the shooter never really existed in the first place.
So the story now is about guns, race, and rage at Republicans--basic bread and butter topics for the media.
“The explusion decision was democatically arrived at, by a democratically elected body. Not undemocratic; unDemocratic only in the sense that the expulsees are members of the self-designated Democratic Party.”
The vote was not democratic. Gerrymandering gave the Republicans in Tennessee a supermajority in both chambers, that is why they could do this. Gerrymandering is undemocratic. The same abuse of a supermajority because of gerrymandering could happen in several states. In WI there is already talk of impeaching the new SC Justice, except in WI, the Assembly is two votes shy of a supermajority.
Critics said that the expulsions were an overreaction that defied the will of the voters who had elected Mr. Jones and Mr. Pearson in Nashville and Memphis
What about the will of all the other voters who don't want their representatives bullhorned over?
“The explusion decision was democatically arrived at, by a democratically elected body. Not undemocratic; unDemocratic only in the sense that the expulsees are members of the self-designated Democratic Party.”
The vote was not democratic. Gerrymandering gave the Republicans in Tennessee a supermajority in both chambers, that is why they could do this. Gerrymandering is undemocratic. The same abuse by a supermajority because of gerrymandering could happen in several states. In WI there is already talk of impeaching the new SC Justice, except in WI, the Assembly is two votes shy of a supermajority.
Two affirmative action insurrectionists, and another who voted present, right? How is this a DIEversity issue? That said, undesirable, even wicked, precedents are set by Democrats.
The NYT's and MSM cheer the jailing of a thousand Protesters from J6, the vast majority of whom committed no crime other than walking into the capital and peeping about.
Now, I'm supposed to care about 2 thugs in the Tenneseee legislature who couldn't behave themselves and let protesters with bullhorns charge onto the house floor - WHILE IT WAS IN SESSION.
And they got expelled. Good! Maybe they will learn some manners. As for the R's 'losing votes'.
LOL! Oh my, the sainted moderates will be "Turned off" by this brutal use of naked power. Yeah, the same sainted moderates who didn't vote against the D's even after the BLM riots and antifa storming the white House and federal buildings all through 2020!
For every soccer mom vote they lost, the Tennessee Republicans energized 10 Trump supporters to go to the polls in 2024 and support them.
The Socialists and Le Pen voters are tearing up France over Macron's ramming through the retirement age. MY what "Bad Optics". I'm sure the sainted French moderates are "Turned off" by it. But if they stop the law, it will be because of riots and incvility, not because a bunch of weak-kneed "Moderates" suddenly decided to vote against Macron.
Reverse the politics of the actors. Still think it would be OK?
A lot of people have had enough.
“We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech.”
We do? Is that right ensconced in one of those penumbra things? And treasured by who? Not me. Some jackass opens up a bullhorn in my ear he’s going to find out what it tastes like.
“We have a tradition of protest in America and a treasured right that entails toleration of disruptive speech.”
We do? Is that right ensconced in one of those penumbra things? And treasured by who? Not me. Some jackass opens up a bullhorn in my ear he’s going to find out what it tastes like.
Why on earth do the Trump supporters keep falling for this? They set a trap for you, and you step right into it. Why? Get your shit together. Now.
It’s Alinsky tactics, push and push and finally your enemy will do something wrong. I don’t value these games. There has to be a response, whether inept or not. Otherwise you have nothing, no dignity at all, and you loose respect. Obama was not afraid to bring a gun to a knife fight.
@Althouse, We. Do. Not. Care. About. The. Backlash.
Exactly.
The hecklers were vetoed.
What gets rewarded gets repeated. Bullhorns in the state house? Wielded by elected representatives? Reward that and it will never stop.
AOC did NOT feel threatened? Even a little?
Charlie Kirk and Riley Gaines have a few thoughts on this.
If democrats would just stop shooting people. Gun crime would drop by 90%.
Also...
Please note: Michael Jordan is famous for scoring the points, not the basketball.
What gets rewarded gets repeated. Bullhorns in the state house? Wielded by elected representatives? Reward that and it will never stop.
Althouse appears to be in favor of the speech that Riley Gaines encountered.
It's OK. They were probably all Democrats.
Why didn't this get the "civility bullshit" tag?
Republicans have to play by the rules, but Democrats don't?
Shorter Dick (9:37)
slurp, slurp
John Henry
On the bright side, all they did was yell.
They didn't go all Preston Brooks with a cane.
So perhaps there has been some improvements in Demmie behavior in the last 170 years. Not much, but some
John Henry
A censure vote would have been adequate.
Nope. Not nearly.
Tennessee has something akin to CSPAN. Go look at the video. It’s not just a protest; it’s the implicit threat of violence.
What Greg the Class Traitor said...@3:05
"And everyone comparing this to the Jan 6th riot.....two wrongs don't make a right. "
Maybe you haven't noticed, but it is everything you do as Republicans is wrong, but as Democrats whatever we do is okay. There is no right when only one side gets away with what they charge the other with constantly. Wake up. It isn't going to end well.
Big Mike is right that the entire, threatening behavior in the chamber is not recorded in your source or by anyone in the MSM. You have to go to the taped recording of the session on public television. One of the two expelled members also previously attacked a legislator, throwing coffee on him in an elevator. He was arrested for assault, but the legislator agreed to a suspended sentence so long as he conducted himself professionally. So this is a chronic problem with this man's behavior.
What they did would get anyone expelled. It is also highly unusual behavior, although probably reflective of the pathetically dysfunctional people who voted for them in the first place.
"...two wrongs don't make a right."
Thus incentivizing being the first to do wrong.
Again, and again, and again.
How about a 'protest bullshit' tag?
Blogger John henry said...
On the bright side, all they did was yell.
They didn't go all Preston Brooks with a cane.
…
These days, it’s particularly good to recall that Florida — a slave state — named a town (Brooksville) in honor of Preston Brooks. It remains so named to this day.
Someone mentioned gerrymandered districts?
My district in Florida (Hillsborough) was so gerrymandered by Democrats that I, living in an agricultural community on the mainland with 60% plus illegal immigrants, had my vote diluted by a slice of St. Petersburg, separated from us by contiguous land south of us and similar to us, and also, egregiously, by Tampa Bay itself.
They were so wealthy and reliably lefty there that Hillsborough needed the electoral bump, despite having nothing in common with the farmland communities they'd never stoop to help, as I did with many hours of community service, child protection, voluntary preparation of food for funerals, and common worship.
Both parties engage in gerrymandering equally. It is a legitimate legislative privilege of the ruling Party. Sorry. I said I wouldn't address you. But after decades in politics, on both sides, I know how this stuff works. Election's main consequences may be drawing districts.
Post a Comment