New in PJ Media:
The Senate on Monday voted unanimously in favor of the Supreme Court Policy Parity Act of 2022, which calls for security details to be provided to “any member [of the] immediate family of the Chief Justice, any Associate Justice, or any officer of the Supreme Court if the Marshal determines such protection is necessary.” Yet despite, or more likely because of, the massive intimidation campaign going on now, including protests at Supreme Court Justices’ homes, to frighten Justices into voting to uphold Roe v. Wade, House Democrats are dragging their feet about getting the bill passed into law. Could it be that they want the intimidation of the Justices to continue? Of course, they do.
Jen Psaki made it clear that the administration wants the protests at the Justices’ homes when she said Tuesday: “I know that there is an outrage … about protests that have been peaceful to date and we certainly continue to encourage that outside of judges’ homes.” This followed what Psaki said on May 5 when Fox News’ Peter Doocy asked her: “These activists posted a map with the home addresses of the Supreme Court justices. Is that the sort of thing this President wants?” Psaki responded: “I think the President’s view is that there is a lot of passion.” In other words, the protests are just fine.
Psaki said this even though such protests are, in fact, illegal, as George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley noted Saturday: “Under 18 U.S.C. 1507, it is a federal crime to protest near a residence occupied by a judge or jury with the intent to influence their decisions in pending cases, and this case remains pending.” But any law is only as strong as the authorities who are willing to enforce it, and it looks as if this particular law has no one willing to enforce it at all.
The House received the bill from the Senate on Monday night. But House Democrats are so terribly, terribly busy — is there a new bill combating hair racism in the works? — that they just haven’t gotten around to taking up the matter. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-N.Y.) said that Democrats were “certainly going to look,” at the bill but refused to give even a hint about when exactly they might actually do so. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who is angling to succeed Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House, acted as if the bill was about as high a priority for House Democrats as the question of where the Trump presidential library will be located: “I assume the appropriate committee will review it,” Jeffries said blandly and turned his attention to more important matters.
There is more. Read the rest here.
Pierre Delecto says
BSARS: Bifurcated Standards Acceptance Reluctance Syndrome
Running rampant on the conservative reservation is the notion of entitlement. At the slightest suggestion that the demands of equity trump the system of legacy injustices the Right expose themselves as dangerous nut cases warranting special DOJ, and, especially, DHS monitoring.
If we are to defend our democracy, secret courts are needed to fill secret prisons with the Dog Whistle Insurrectional Element.
Before it’s too late.
gravenimage says
Sarcasm?
somehistory says
Andrew McCarthy says it is the president’s responsibility to see that this Law is applied in this situation.
Guessing since biden is not a *real* president, no one can do anything to get the cops to arrest the mobs of people who are menacing these Justices and their families.
No one even knows the names of the “clerks” of the Court, but anyone can find the names of the 9 Justices. And, the clerks aren’t the people making the decision to scuttle the previous, and wrong, ruling.
This is clearly meant by the house to keep the riots going until one or more of the Justices cries uncle.
As far as he media is concerned, anything “bo” biden and the others are doing is just hunky=dory.
The “washington post” ran an article about it being a “faux” story that biden was sending baby formula to the border for the illegals. as if, he wasn’t doing that.
Then, FOX news people spoke on air with a Rep who saw the pallets of baby formula at the border and was told that more were headed that way.
Now the wapo is running a different headline…”Wash Post fact-checker calls uproar over Biden sending baby formula to border amidst shortage ‘faux outrage”
gravenimage says
And this is during a shortage on baby formula.
Infidel says
And they accused President Trump of heading an insurrection. But even the most militant on the Right never advocated menacing any court judges
gravenimage says
Do House Dems Want Supreme Court Justices Menaced? Looks That Way.
……………….
It *does* look that way. Protesting outside judges’ homes is both inappropriate and *illegal*. I would stand against this in any case, even if there was a proposed case I completely disagreed with. You should not intimidate judges and threaten their families.
Demonstrations in public areas or outside the courts is fine; outside judges’ homes is not.