Biden DOJ Fails to Enforce Federal Law Against Protesting Outside the Homes of SCOTUS Justices – Opinion

Shame on all of us law-abiding Americans. Apparently, we missed the caveat allowing U.S. attorneys general, as America’s chief law enforcement officers, to refuse to enforce laws with which they disagree; including violations of federal law that pose direct threats to Supreme Court justices and their families.

Oh, yeah — we also missed the part in the presidential oath of office that allows a president to Encourage those who are in violation of federal law to keep doing so. Planet Looney Tunes Nope. Merrick Garland as Attorney General and Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. as the ineptest president of modern history.

Any questions? Me, too.

As Nick Arama reported, the story of our radical leftist march to Justice Samuel Alito’s Virginia home began on Monday night. While it was unclear if Alito or his family were home, there was a visible police presence outside the generally-conservative justice’s home.

The protest appeared to be a direct violation of federal law —18 U.S. Code § 1507 – Picketing or Parading:

Any person who attempts to interfere with, hinder or impair the administration or justice-giving process, or intends to influence any judge or juror witness, judge or court official in discharge of their duty by staging pickets and parades near or within a United States court of law, or near or occupied building used by such judge or juror witness, judge or court officer or any similar device, or resorts any other demonstration near or inside such buildings or residences shall be subject either to this or both of the following penalties

You would think that black and white is the same thing. It is.

Why then did Jen Psaki, White House Press Secretary, not respond last Friday Protect the “right” of angry pro-abortion activists to protest outside conservative justices’ homes, as reported by my colleague, Sister Toldjah, during a back-and-forth with Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy?

DOOCY: “So he doesn’t care if they’re protesting outside the Supreme Court or outside [a justice’s]Privat residence

PSAKI: “I don’t have an official U.S. government position on where people protest.”

DOOCY: “These activists posted a map with the home addresses of the Supreme Court justices. Is that kind of thing this president wants?”

PSAKI: “The reason people are protesting is because women across the country are worried about their fundamental rights.”

Yeah well, Circle-Back. Again, U.S. CodeIt has been a Very clearNo matter what your boss does, you can decide where and how people protest. And, P.S.: WhyDemonstrators protest make no difference here, the law is the Law.

DOOCY: “So he doesn’t care if they’re protesting outside the Supreme Court or outside [a justice’s] private residence?”

PSAKI: “I don’t have an official U.S. government position on where people protest.”

Really?

Do you like Title 18, Section 1507 of the United States Code, too? https://t.co/ys1NorIFsj pic.twitter.com/4ZRioVwHtj

— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) May 6, 2022

It continues as before, but neither Biden nor Psaki are willing to condemn illegal protests. Toss in Biden’s lackey attorney general, Merrick Garland for tHe trifecta. Speaking of Garland — the weaselly guy who conservatives can continue to count their lucky stars never became a SCOTUS justice — where the hell has he been? And other than crickets

Andrew McCarthy noted this in an opinion piece for National Review on Tuesday entitled DOJ’s Silence on the Left’s Lawless Intimidation of Supreme Court Justices, the former federal prosecutor slammed the DOJ’s refusal to take enforcement action against radical leftists who continue the protests, blatantly attempting to intimidate and influence the Court over the draft decision striking down Roe v. Wade.

First Amendment allows reasonable time, place and manner restrictions. The degree of permissible restrictiveness is heightened as the government’s interest becomes stronger.

Because the Constitution protects the judiciary against politics, it’s obvious that government has an interest in protecting the integrity and the rule of law. This includes safeguarding judges and jurors from intimidation, corrupt influence, as well as safeguarding litigation participants (e.g. pressure to resolve a case on fear and not on faithful application of the law).

And what about the shoe-on-the-other-foot hypocrisy test, according to McCarthy?

Notable is the fact that the Justice Department has brought charges against scores of protesters in relation to the Capitol Riot. parading on restricted federal territory. Parading is also prohibited under Section 1507.

Biden Justice and FBI wanted everybody to know that it was burning the earth to bring everyone accountable for violating the law.

Under Attorney General Merrick Garland’s guidance, prosecutors turned a deaf ear to people who claimed “I was just peacefully protesting,” [even]If the demonstration was in violation of law.

Amen, Andy. They are all there.

What about Biden? His hypocritical crickets — including multiple idiotic comments from his ridiculous press secretary? Marc Thiessen is a Fox News columnist and also writes for The Washington Post. Protesting at justices’ homes is illegal. How can Biden address it?

Great question.

As Thiessen pointed out, the ongoing protests are not just obnoxious behavior; they are in violation of federal law (18 U.S. Code § 1507, as outlined at the top). “So what’s Biden doing about it?”, Thiessen asked, rhetorically. He followed up by spelling it out.

This is a federal statute, so it’s Attorney General Merrick Garland’s responsibility to enforce it. […] Garland declared at the time, “Threats against public servants are not only illegal; they run counter to our nation’s core values.”

Are we missing something? Is our Supreme Court Justice not a public servant? If they are — of course, they are — do blatant attempts to intimidate them not run counter to our core values, let alone violate federal law? (Yes. Yes. And hell.

Thiessen then went bottom-line on Garland — as well as our intrepid president, who never met a buck he didn’t eagerly pass as soon as he could.

Garland’s failure to act is an appalling dereliction of duty. So is Biden’s failure to condemn the protests. During his victory speech after the election, Biden declared that it was time “stop treating our opponents as our enemy.” In his inaugural address, he promised to “end this uncivil war” and put “my whole soul” into “bringing America together.”

He has not only failed to keep his promise but he also modelled the behavior that protesters now emulate. When Republicans blocked his partisan election law, Biden accused them of standing with racists and traitors, and called them “enemies” of America, thundering, “I will defend the right to vote, our democracy against all enemies — foreign and, yes, domestic.”

“That sent a signal that our fellow Americans who disagree with us are in fact “enemies” and can be treated as such,” Thiessen correctly noted.

You can threaten or intimidate your enemy if they are your enemy.

As the outrage over the inaction from Biden and Garland’s Justice Department continued to grow on Wednesday, a DOJ spokesman late in the day released a statement declaring Garland has “directed the U.S. Marshal’s Service to help ensure the Justices’ safety by providing additional support to the Marshal of the Supreme Court and Supreme Court Police.”

Nebulous, much?

This afternoon’s statement from the DOJ stated that Attorney General Merrick Garland had “directed U.S. Marshal’s Service is to provide additional support to Supreme Court Police and Marshal of Supreme Court Supreme Court. This will ensure Justices’ safety.

— Amy Howe (@AHoweBlogger) May 11, 2022

The radical left continues to play. As the pro-abortion activists continue to violate federal law, Psaki and Biden continue to publicly support their “peaceful,” illegal-as-hell actions. Pressure builds on Garland’s DOJ, forcing a spokesman to issue a milquetoast statement that says virtually nothing in detail.

Maybe it’s just me, but this ain’t no way to run a country.

That is unless you’re the most inept president in modern history, surrounded by a band of equally-inept sides, all of whom view their jobs as flying wingmen for the radical left. We didn’t even know!