Is There A Law Prohibiting protesting In Front Of A Judges Residence??

Do you chill while wearing your vagina hat? Originally Posted by bambino

Don't you have a mule to follow?

Don't you have a mule to follow? Originally Posted by WTF

you're mule-ing too much!

The question is whether or not they are attempting to sway a judicial decision (they are-- but proving it is another matter). Originally Posted by Grace Preston

Proving intent in this instance is comically easy... since the case has not been ruled on, that IS what they are doing. You might have an argument if the ruling had been issued, but since they are doing so post leak and prior to the full ruling, that can be the only interpretation of their actions.

Proving intent in this instance is comically easy... since the case has not been ruled on, that IS what they are doing. You might have an argument if the ruling had been issued, but since they are doing so post leak and prior to the full ruling, that can be the only interpretation of their actions. Originally Posted by texassapper

You say this with such conviction...

My money is on Grace being correct and the reason why no arrests.

There is a pretty good argument to be made that the lowering of the vote from 60 to 50 has politicized the SC beyond repair.

I do not think Progressives will win any more cases going forward.

Proving intent in this instance is comically easy... since the case has not been ruled on, that IS what they are doing. You might have an argument if the ruling had been issued, but since they are doing so post leak and prior to the full ruling, that can be the only interpretation of their actions. Originally Posted by texassapper

Exactly and you wouldn't need a law degree to win that in any courtroom. Before a decision, you are by definition and common sense, "trying to influence". After the vote, you are protesting the vote.

Whiney little biotches. Poor poor gop...sore losers and can't take the heat for being fucking morans

Dah...blame blame blame

Exactly and you wouldn't need a law degree to win that in any courtroom. Before a decision, you are by definition and common sense, "trying to influence". After the vote, you are protesting the vote. Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Under you standard....everyone on this board is engaging in prostitution or intending to.

Texas law allows a homeowner to shoot a trespasser.

Most of the time, it doesn't even go to a Grand Jury.

i don't have to prove it. there is law that prevents this. any lawyer? sweetpea, the entire Supreme Court are lawyers. every one liberal or conservative would strike down "free speech" in this clear case of intimidation.



there are reasons why laws exist against such intimidation. you don't want Roe v Wade overturned so you condone this type of activity. free speech has limits. just ask the justices, Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

This is what I found. Looks to me like it applies.

18 U.S. Code § 1507 - Picketing or parading

U.S. Code
Notes

prev | next

Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Nothing in this section shall interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of the United States of its power to punish for contempt.

Under you standard....everyone on this board is engaging in prostitution or intending to. Originally Posted by WTF

I'm on a whore board. Who engages or intends with me?





Prayer groups hoping a lightning bolt doesn't strike Justice. In the head.