Author Topic: Youngkin: Garland not going to enforce law barring protests outside justices' homes  (Read 268 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 349,645
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Youngkin: Garland not going to enforce law barring protests outside justices' homes
by Max Thornberry, Associate News Editor |
 | May 18, 2022 10:19 PM

Virginia’s governor is skeptical that the country’s top law enforcement official is going to make sure laws are upheld evenly.

Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin told Jesse Watters he doesn’t think Attorney General Merrick Garland is going to enforce the law when it comes to protesters picketing outside the homes of Supreme Court justices.

“Gov. Hogan and I have absolutely demanded that Attorney General Garland enforce the federal statute, which is to put people in jail for parading and picketing in front of the justices’ homes,” Youngkin said Wednesday night. “I don’t think he will, and he absolutely should. It’s clear in the statute that that’s illegal, and he should enforce it.”

more
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/youngkin-garland-not-going-to-enforce-law-barring-protests-outside-justices-homes
Don't forget 10% for the "Big Guy"
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is a disgrace, that two become a lawfirm & that three or more become a congress." -John Adams

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”

-Matthew 6:34

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 41,460
  • Twitter is for Twits
HOW can anyone think it is legal to do this,and not political harrassment?
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Offline catfish1957

  • FJB!!!!!!!!
  • Cat Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,152
  • Gender: Male
Garland was nominated by Obama for a SCOTUS spot.

Wish one reporter with balls would ask how he would feel if a 1000 protestors showed up at his door if he was confirmed.
I display the Confederate Battle Flag in honor of my great great great grandfathers who spilled blood at Wilson's Creek and Shiloh.  5 others served in the WBTS with honor too.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 30,447
Can a state enforce federal law if the federal government has refused to do so?
#LetsGoBrandon!

Offline Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 74,589
  • Gender: Male
Can a state enforce federal law if the federal government has refused to do so?

Virginia has state laws that are being violated.  Claiming Garland is sitting on things is both accurate and pointless.  Fix it yourself, Gubnor!  You have the tools.
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline rustynail

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,067
Can a state enforce federal law if the federal government has refused to do so?

No.  Arizona tried to enforce immigration law and got slapped down.

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 30,447
Virginia has state laws that are being violated.  Claiming Garland is sitting on things is both accurate and pointless.  Fix it yourself, Gubnor!  You have the tools.

If Virginia has the necessary laws, then I agree, Virginia should be enforcing.
#LetsGoBrandon!

Offline Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 74,589
  • Gender: Male
If Virginia has the necessary laws, then I agree, Virginia should be enforcing.

I understand they do have state laws against picketing Judge's homes that are stronger than the National laws.  But I admit I'm not as read-up as I should be about this... :shrug:
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline Kamaji

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 30,447
I understand they do have state laws against picketing Judge's homes that are stronger than the National laws.  But I admit I'm not as read-up as I should be about this... :shrug:

Apparently, Virginia does have a general statute that prohibits picketing in front of residences, but it contains an exception for labor-related picketing that may result in it being unconstitutional:  https://reason.com/volokh/2022/05/06/residential-picketing-in-virginia-outside-a-justices-home-or-otherwise/
#LetsGoBrandon!

Offline Free Vulcan

  • Technical
  • ****
  • Posts: 18,646
  • Gender: Male
  • Ah, the air is so much fresher here...
Given the FedGov likes to slap down states who step up to do what the FedGov refuses to do, Younkin is making the smart move trumpet this in the media.

I imagine he's already got assets keeping an eye on things.
We are two countries now.

Offline GtHawk

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,165
  • Gender: Male
  • I don't believe in if anymore, if's an illusion.
Garland was nominated by Obama for a SCOTUS spot.

Wish one reporter with balls would ask how he would feel if a 1000 protestors showed up at his door if he was confirmed.
Such a hypothetical would never happen, h's a liberal tool so would always go far left and conservative don't show up in large numbers or make personal threats of violence against Justices and their families.

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 30,147
  • Gender: Male
sneakypete wonders:
"HOW can anyone think it is legal to do this,and not political harrassment?"

What does this say?
"...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

As to what it means (exactly) -- well, I sense that will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in a soon-to-be-upcoming case.

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 41,460
  • Twitter is for Twits
sneakypete wonders:
"HOW can anyone think it is legal to do this,and not political harrassment?"

What does this say?
"...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

As to what it means (exactly) -- well, I sense that will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in a soon-to-be-upcoming case.

@Fishrrman

And I am afraid,thanks to the anti-Trumpers and voting fraud,the result is not going to be positive from our POV.

The left is obviously after nothing less than the total destruction of the American way of life,and replacing it with a leftist police state. They will stop at nothing.
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!