Gorsuch hammers Biden DOJ on ‘mostly peaceful protests’

[Valletta]

Two of the four counts against former President Donald Trump in special counsel Jack Smith's election subversion case are also related to the same question, which is whether the statute known as 1512(c)(2) that makes it a federal crime to "corruptly" obstruct an official proceeding applies to otherwise nonviolent protesters.

Gorsuch hammers Biden DOJ on ‘mostly peaceful protests’

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch on Tuesday questioned the Biden administration’s ranking Justice Department lawyer about the scope of a federal criminal law used against protesters during the Jan. 6

gazette.com

The politicization of the Justice Department is a tragedy for America.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The politicization of the Justice Department is a tragedy for America.

Try this version:

The politicization of the Justice Department Supreme Court is a tragedy for America.

Gorsuch's whataboutism was just his political view coming through.

 

[DaisyDay]

The politicization of the Justice Department is a tragedy for America.

Donald did his best to politicize the DOJ to be loyal to him, rather than to the country.

 

[Fantine]

The plaintiff in the Supreme Court case had 8 other convictions which were upheld.

The insurrection still has many hundreds of valid convictions.

The Supreme Court could protect protesters who sensibly realized things had gone too far and hung back.

While I believe that all of the protesters exercised extremely poor judgment, the ones who came to their senses quickly should not be prosecuted.

 

[Aldebaran]

Try this version:

The politicization of the Justice Department Supreme Court is a tragedy for America.

Gorsuch's whataboutism was just his political view coming through.

It was also a good way for him to indicate to the rest of the court that an action taken by the SCOTUS doesn't just affect those on one side of the political spectrum. If Trump or other conservatives are to be punished for something, then it would apply equally to liberals as well, which means they would also be punished.
Equal justice under the law.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It was also a good way for him to indicate to the rest of the court that an action taken by the SCOTUS doesn't just affect those on one side of the political spectrum. If Trump or other conservatives are to be punished for something, then it would apply equally to liberals as well, which means they would also be punished.

The issue at question is whether the obstruction statute applies to physical interventions rather than just document destruction, falsification, etc. If these other "protests" involved "obstruction of a (federal) proceeding" then they are relevant and the *intent* to obstruct the proceeding itself. I don't think his generic "whatabouts" fit both conditions to match the usage of this statute as charged in the Jan6th cases.

Equal justice under the law.

If only I believed that was his intent.

 

[Fantine]

The Supreme Court should really tiptoe around this one. How would they feel about "peaceful protesters" moving en masse into their courtroom?

The Supreme Court, Thomas and Alito in particular, have infuriated dozens of groups. They have been the principals in dismantling the Voting Rights Act which could cause millions of black voters to be disenfranchised by their overly zealous red states. They have been the principals in overturning Roe v. Wade. They have sided with corporations to give workers fewer protections and more dangerous workplaces. They have voted for more and more guns while devastated, mourning parents are still griefstricken over the children they have lost in school shootings.

What is there to recommend the conservatives on the Supreme Court, really? If they don't take the 1/6 insurrectionists seriously, there will be others on their doorstep.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

It's even funnier to listen to otherwise intelligent people try to defend all this skullduggery. What an embarrassing legacy they will have to endure.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's even funnier to listen to otherwise intelligent people try to defend all this skullduggery. What an embarrassing legacy they will have to endure.

I know. Imagine defending those who planned and violently attacked the US Congress.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I know. Imagine defending those who planned and violently attacked the US Congress.

Yes... they really wreaked havoc. They broke a window. I think someone threw some papers around. A few fire extinguishers were sprayed around. Some guy had the gall to turn over a whole table. The whole thing!
Havoc, I tell you... pure havoc.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

The Supreme Court should really tiptoe around this one. How would they feel about "peaceful protesters" moving en masse into their courtroom?

The Supreme Court, Thomas and Alito in particular, have infuriated dozens of groups. They have been the principals in dismantling the Voting Rights Act which could cause millions of black voters to be disenfranchised by their overly zealous red states. They have been the principals in overturning Roe v. Wade. They have sided with corporations to give workers fewer protections and more dangerous workplaces. They have voted for more and more guns while devastated, mourning parents are still griefstricken over the children they have lost in school shootings.

What is there to recommend the conservatives on the Supreme Court, really? If they don't take the 1/6 insurrectionists seriously, there will be others on their doorstep.

It is all politically motivated. Everyone knows it. The justices know it. It is a joke.

 

[Hank77]

Two of the four counts against former President Donald Trump in special counsel Jack Smith's election subversion case are also related to the same question, which is whether the statute known as 1512(c)(2) that makes it a federal crime to "corruptly" obstruct an official proceeding applies to otherwise nonviolent protesters.

Gorsuch hammers Biden DOJ on ‘mostly peaceful protests’

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch on Tuesday questioned the Biden administration’s ranking Justice Department lawyer about the scope of a federal criminal law used against protesters during the Jan. 6

gazette.com

The politicization of the Justice Department is a tragedy for America.

Listen to it and/or read it for yourself.

Oral Argument - Audio File

 

[rambot]

Yes... they really wreaked havoc. They broke a window. I think someone threw some papers around. A few fire extinguishers were sprayed around. Some guy had the gall to turn over a whole table. The whole thing!
Havoc, I tell you... pure havoc.

Yes. This characterization of events led several Capitol officer to take their own lives from the ptsd inducing events of the day

Disgusting.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yes. This characterization of events led several Capitol officer to take their own lives from the ptsd inducing events of the day

Disgusting.

"This characterization of events"? And here we've been told that it was because of the events themselves.

 

[BPPLEE]

Donald did his best to politicize the DOJ to be loyal to him, rather than to the country.

He may have tried. Biden succeeded

 

[Pommer]

He may have tried. Biden succeeded

The evidence of this…is?

 

[DaisyDay]

He may have tried. Biden succeeded

That’s contrary to actual facts. Both Biden and his AG Garland have taken a hands off approach. Donald himself asked various departments to go after his enemies and to drop charges against his allies.

 

[Desk trauma]

The Supreme Court should really tiptoe around this one. How would they feel about "peaceful protesters" moving en masse into their courtroom?

Why tip toe? They have already demanded that protesters be kept out of sight of their homes after ruling exclusion zones around abortion drs homes were unconstitutional. Rulings are for plebs not our betters on the supreme court’s bench.

 

[The Barbarian]

The politicization of the Justice Department is a tragedy for America.

Would be, if it happens. That could happen...

The Radical Strategy Behind Trump’s Promise to ‘Go After’ Biden​

Conservatives with close ties to Donald J. Trump are laying out a “paradigm-shifting” legal rationale to erase the Justice Department’s independence from the president.

The Radical Strategy Behind Trump’s Promise to ‘Go After’ Biden

Conservatives with close ties to Donald J. Trump are laying out a “paradigm-shifting” legal rationale to erase the Justice Department’s independence from the president.

www.nytimes.com

Trump threw a hissy fit and eventually fired his first AG when he was told that he couldn't just order the arrest of Hillary Clinton. Problem was, even his appointees weren't corrupt enough to go along with that.

He realized his error, and intends to make the Justice Department his weapon of revenge.

 

[The Barbarian]

It is all politically motivated. Everyone knows it. The justices know it. It is a joke.

This is why polls show that Americans regard today's Supreme Court justices just below rabid coyotes.

They don't care, because the plan is to make elections irrelevant to government.