The Libtard Insurrection on the Supreme Court

berryberry's Avatar
... I don't agree... They no doubt know who the leaker is.
It might even be a Justice. ... Maybe Chuck Schumer can
surely threaten some of them again.

I do got a question - the media members calling for people
to "BURN The Country Down" --- will they be investigated
and imprisoned as "Domestic Terrorists"??

### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again
Yeah Salty - there were plenty of Libtard activists and media calling for violence, burning down the court, etc. They and the person who leaked this are causing a real insurrection.

But our senile President didn't even acknowledge the grave danger leaking this has done. So I doubt the libtard responsible as well as those inciting violence will ever be imprisoned even though they should be
It’s not a matter of agreement vs disagreement. It’s wild speculation versus evidence. Some people have become such Pardison cooks that they’re willing to work themselves up into a frenzy about invisible liberal insurrectionists despite zero evidence to support their claims.

Neither side of the political spectrum has any more or less incentive to leak this, and the leak should not anger anyone who isn’t looking for a boogeyman to rail against. Originally Posted by El-mo
... Hmmmmm... okay... Fair enough, mate.

#### Salty
This thread is satire.
berryberry's Avatar
More Jonathon Turley - I hope the libtards who are making excuses to dismiss this egregious leak and attack on the USSC are paying attention. This is a true insurrection

Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade leak: The end of integrity and ethics?

Five seemingly perfunctory words from the Supreme Court — “The Court has no comment” — hit like a thunderclap late Monday night. Politico had just posted what it claimed to be the working draft of a majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade and its progeny in the blockbuster abortion case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

Most court observers surely must have hoped this was an elaborate hoax, that someone had not shattered every legal and judicial ethical rule by leaking a draft opinion. But there was no denial from the court.

Even if this is truly the current draft opinion, it is subject to change and may indeed have already changed in both its analysis and support. Draft majority opinions have a nasty habit of becoming dissents or fracturing into pieces as justices work through the details on a case.

The opinion apparently was written by Associate Justice Samuel Alito and joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. If unchanged, it would declare that “Roe and Casey must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

Such a ruling would return the question of reproductive rights to the states. Most would likely continue to support the right, but it would become a matter for each state to resolve through their own democratic process.

The indeterminacy of the draft and uncertainty of the future did not stop instant, dystopian predictions. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) immediately declared: “So, this would appear to be an invitation to have, you know, Handmaid’s Tale type anti-feminist regulation and legislation all over the country.”

The final language and meaning of the decision is literally yet to be written. What is clear is that the court itself has been hit with one of the greatest scandals in its history, and certainly the greatest crisis faced by Chief Justice John Roberts in his tenure.

Even in a city that traffics in leaks from every agency and every corner of government, this was an unspeakably unethical act. The Supreme Court deals with transformative cases that drive to the very heart of our political, cultural and religious divisions, yet justices and clerks have maintained a tradition of strict civility and confidentiality on such drafts.

So what changed?

We changed.

We do not know what motivated this leaker other than to unleash a public and political firestorm. The assumption is that the individual wanted to pressure the court to reconsider its purported path, and to push Congress to pass pending legislation to codify Roe. Yet, this act is such an attack on the very foundation of the court that it is dangerous to assume a specific motivation other than disruption.

What is clear is that the court has become a tragic anachronism in our age of rage: an institution that relied on the integrity and ethics of its members and staff at a time when such values are treated as naive. It relied on justices and clerks alike remaining bound to the institution and to each other by a constitutional faith.

But we are living in an age of constitutional atheism, so it is only surprising that it took this long. For years, politicians, pundits and academics have called for reckless political action against the court.

Many Democrats in Congress have pledged to achieve political goals “by any means necessary,” including packing or gutting the court. Democratic leaders have hammered away at the court and its members, demanding that the court adhere to political demands or face institutional disaster. The threats have grown increasingly raw and reckless as politicians sought to outdo each other in their attacks. In the age of rage, restraint is a lethal liability.

The message has been repeated like a drumbeat: The ends justify the means.

Recently, Roberts even went public with a warning over “inappropriate political influence” affecting the court. Yet, the day before this leak, the court itself defied critics who portrayed it as hopelessly and dysfunctionally divided with another unanimous decision. It ruled in a major case on speech that Boston could not discriminate against a religious organization that wanted to hoist a flag outside of its city hall. It spoke with one voice in defense of shared constitutional values.

Given the relentless calls from political leaders, we may have been naive to think that a staff member or clerk would not yield to the same “ends justify the means” rationale. Former Justice Louis Brandeis once warned that “Our government … teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”

With our leaders continually expressing utter contempt for the court and its traditions, it is hardly surprising that such traditions lose meaning for some working in the court itself. That did not happen overnight, and it really cannot be dismissed as the act of a single rogue employee. It was a collective effort by those who bred contempt for our legal institutions and values. This is not a crisis of the court. It is a crisis of faith.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...ty-and-ethics/
berryberry's Avatar
Has there been a single major Democrat who has condemned the leak of the SCOTUS decision? One?

The libtard "NORMS ARE BEING DESTROYED" crowd is utterly full of shit
berryberry's Avatar
The double standard:

Ashley Biden’s diary was handed to Project Veritas. They turned it over to law enforcement and after doing so, FBI raided their journalists’ homes & offices and spied on them.

Politico was handed a draft Supreme Court decision. They published it. Crickets.
berryberry's Avatar
Psaki asked about the Supreme Court leak and whether the White House condemns it or whether it is welcomed. She says they don't have a view of the leak. Remarkable.
berryberry's Avatar
Insurrection underway: Libtard groups are directing militants to mob the homes of US Supreme Court justices.

Libtards have posted a website with the justices' private addresses. Protestors are being asked to go directly to their homes (some have families and small children).

This is part of what the libtard leak intended
bambino's Avatar
Another “summer of love” is coming.
Insurrection underway: Libtard groups are directing militants to mob the homes of US Supreme Court justices.

Libtards have posted a website with the justices' private addresses. Protestors are being asked to go directly to their homes (some have families and small children).

This is part of what the libtard leak intended Originally Posted by berryberry
... AS I asked already - will the people out there
threatening violence be arrested and charged with
Domestic Terrorism??

### Salty
berryberry's Avatar
I think you know the answer to that question Salty. They were putting up even bigger fences around the USSC tonight given the threats from the left

berryberry's Avatar
It is clearly obstruction of justice, under the U.S. Code, to send protesters to federal judges’ homes to attempt to influence their decisions on pending cases. It is also very dangerous — even deadly — to reveal the home addresses of federal judges.

Liberal group calls for protests at conservative Supreme Court justices' homes - Group says they will visit the homes on May 11

Left-wing activist groups are planning to send protesters to the homes of conservative Supreme Court justices following a leak indicating the court may soon overturn Roe v. Wade.

The activists are organizing under the moniker "Ruth Sent Us" and have published the supposed home addresses of Justices Amy Coney Barrett, John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

"Our 6-3 extremist Supreme Court routinely issues rulings that hurt women, racial minorities, LGBTQ+ and immigrant rights," the group's website reads. "We must rise up to force accountability using a diversity of tactics."

Fox News is told there has been a strong police presence at the justices' homes following the leak. The group says they will visit the homes on May 11.

The D.C. Police Department has erected fencing around the Supreme Court building in anticipation of escalating protests this weekend. Police have also activated protest-response units through Sunday.

more

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/lib...-justice-homes
berryberry's Avatar
Utterly digusting. Senile Biden won't criticize people putting the conservative justices lives at risk by publishing their addresses and encouraging protests against their families. And if it was right wing activists doing this, they would have the FBI breaking their door down and every media outlet would be reporting on it.

Doocy: "These activists posted a map with the home addresses of the Supreme Court justices. Is that the sort of thing this President wants?"

Psaki: "I think the President's view is that there is a lot of passion."

Disgusting that the White House is refusing to condemn this.

Watch

https://twitter.com/i/status/1522344086497370112
berryberry's Avatar
The Senile Biden White House…

–REFUSES to condemn the unprecedented SCOTUS leak

–REFUSES to condemn protesters targeting the private homes of justices

–REFUSES to say if justices should be harassed into issuing a new opinion

–REFUSES to say if Court’s opinion will be legitimate
berryberry's Avatar
Clarence Thomas says 'tremendously bad' abortion draft leak changed the Supreme Court 'forever' - 'What happened at the court is tremendously bad,' Thomas said

A draft decision leaked from the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month has fundamentally altered the judicial body, potentially doing irreparable damage, Justice Clarence Thomas said during a conference in Dallas Friday evening.

"I do think that what happened at the court is tremendously bad... I wonder how long we’re going to have these institutions at the rate we’re undermining them," Thomas said at the Old Parkland Conference.

The leak — not the decision’s potential implication of overturning Roe v. Wade — has potentially done irreparable harm to people’s trust in the institution, the veteran justice said.

"When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I’m in, it changes the institution fundamentally. You begin to look over your shoulder. It’s like kind of an infidelity that you can explain it, but you can’t undo it," Thomas added.

The high court’s secrecy has been an integral part of the judicial process, allowing justices to deliberate free of outside pressures, he added, noting the members of the court did not think such a leak could even occur.

"Oh, that’s impossible. No one would ever do that," he said, theorizing how people thought of the Supreme Court’s exclusivity prior to the leak.

"Now that trust or that belief is gone forever," Thomas claimed.

Thomas also suggested there has been a recent trend to undermine the Supreme Court, challenging its integrity and impartialness — and a new phenomenon of citizens showing up to members’ homes and holding them personally responsible.

The justice said, however, the trend was among liberals and that conservatives have not acted in this way.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cla...-court-forever