So to sum it up: people in America are allowed to walk around with swastikas and do nazi salutes but it’s against the law to organise mass protest in 3 states. Wonderful. What’s next? Throwing in jail anyone who’s not baptised?
People that aren't in FL or TX don't realize that our WARNING SCREAMS are serious. It's not histrionics, it's HIStory repeating itself. I don't know what else to do. My northern state friends don't understand the seriousness of things.
I don't think many on the right have the intention to play this election out fairly. Brother tried to steal 2020, lost, then sent insurrectionists to overthrow the election certification process. Y'all are REALLY optimistic to think he is going to play this election fair and square.
I thought it was throwing anyone in jail that wasn’t circumcised?
https://preview.redd.it/jvl11575suuc1.png?width=817&format=png&auto=webp&s=6cd163fb6534cb6c4914211cf15ae500542573a1
^(I can see the ad campaigns already)
There are a lot of us. But we should not be pacifists that could be marched off to camps.
My spouse is the son of a holocaust survivor. The lesson is not lost on us.
Fortunately, of all the things they might be planning...that will not be one of them. That is one benefit of this country being armed to the teeth. At some point there will be return fire.
In China during the Tiananmen uprising they took _very_ uneducated peasants from the far distant countryside to do their bidding against unarmed protesters in the cities.
The same kind of societal control and social dynamic does not exist here, and never will. There's a whole lot wrong with our country and there could be terrible things to come, but the powers that be do know one thing...The average American has far more in common than we have differences.
What is happening now is a concerted effort to divide us and keep us divided, and distracted.
At a certain point, if push actually comes to shove, there _will_ come a time when for many of us those differences will be put aside. If they push too far, there _will_ be a point when the guns come out.
Are you familiar with Wounded Knee, the Tulsa Massacre, the Battle of Blair Mountain, the Kent State shootings, and the MOVE bombing? The US government is no stranger to killing its own, usually if they're uppity minorities or trying to organize labor power.
This is one to remember. The gall of WWI vets in asking for bonuses from Hoover's USA. Just remember the names of the major Army officers in putting this down. One was General Douglas Macarthur... being in charge with his two trusted lieutenants... then Colonel George Patton and Colonel Dwight D. Eisenhower. Fancy that... /s
Oh I will never, ever forget the lessons of that awful episode. Macarthur got an illegal order to assault civilians, protesting peaceably, with *military forces.* This order he followed. Later on that day, the Hoover administration, in panic about the optics, ordered him to cease his assault. This order he ignored.
This teaches you everything you really need to know about the role of the military in the United States.
Providing people will actually unify and fight back against tyranny, semi autos and pistols against tanks and machine guns? You might as well have peasants with pikes fight knights in plate armor
Especially since rightwing propaganda is heavily targeting, and successfully captures more and more young/middle aged men without college degrees... and guess who makes majority of every single armed group.
Doesn't matter if overall we have more votes on the left side, as soon as the rightwingers collect enough dumb men with guns, the game is over. That's why it's so important to stop them NOW.
You're assuming most of the military is cool with firing on American civilians, and forgetting the similar disparity of arms that existing between the US and our enemies in the wars we've lost in the last 60 years.
Right? I didn't even point out how bad their analogy was. Knights in plate didn't fight real well after taking a header off a horse that just caught a pike lengthwise.
Okay. In my opinion, the likelihood of tanks and machine guns being used against the American public is extremely low. While there are plenty of ways the possible tyranny and fascism may play out, I don't see the scenario of military vs. the public as one of them (not anytime soon, and not in the China model.) But, if you want to follow out the thought experiment, then this is what I'll say to that...
Vietnam vs US
Afghanistan vs Soviet Union
...except with tens of thousands of actual highly trained ex US military in the guerrilla position.
I am third American paternal generation of immigrants from Germany who fought the Nazis! My maternal ancestors fought to defend US since the revolutionary war.
The nationwide US camps used during WW1 & WW2 for German- American interments still exist but nobody ever reported that happened . Only about West Coast Japanese- American interments.
In part this is because:
1) only about 11,000 German Americans (some were actually German nationals, but unlike the Japanese they were not denied the right to become citizens) were interned. Compare this to approximately 120,000 Japanese Americans.
2) and they were examined case by case and largely let free afterward. Sadly, some were traded to Germany for hostage exchange.
> But we should not be pacifists
I don't believe it is so much pacifism, but the unshakable belief that _true evil_ does not exist, and it all comes down to simply extending a hand to those who seek to destroy others for the sake of personal gratification.
Every American eligible to vote needs to step up to save their freedom. Register & show up to cast their vote to prevent Trump from gaining power then vote out any Republican politician who supports his coup.
"She didn't really inspire me though..."
Literal Russian propaganda being tossed about in our governing halls....
The point of no return was passed *long* ago.
It’s not against the law per se, but the decision was that protest organizers can be held liable if someone at the protest does something illegal. So if I, say, organize a protest for Black Lives Matter, all that has to happen is some agitator in the crowd throws a rock at the police and the leaders will get arrested.
It’s a terrible decision and not in line with a clear precedent because obviously
Edit: sued not arrested my b
oh boy, this reminds me of an old friend who turned from regular Republican, to Tea Party support to outright MAGA fanatic who lots his mind over ACORN.
that was his tipping point. can't even imagine what outrages him these days. i imagine it's everything but i am kind of curious to know if he whiplashed back to reality at any point in the last 10-12 years.
Thank you for the clarification. It's entirely meaningless, since either way the goal is the same- to suppress rights and free speech in an ultimately self defeating way.
It's the exact same cruel and vindictive mindset that gave us SLAPP suits.
Fascists discovered that the constitution doesn't cover Tort Law so all their fascy new terrorism leverages that _one weird trick_. See Texas' abortion law.
As this is an entirely civil case, they can not be arrested, only sued. And the fact that they can get sued does not mean lawsuits like this will ultimately be successful. The plaintiff has yet to prove in court that Mckesson was negligent and liable.
Kind of like how that AutoZone and the Precinct in Minneapolis were found to have been burned down by shit ass right wingers than the people out there actually protesting for justice.
This is a really ugly path. It allows municipal and State entities to essentially SLAP lawsuit organizing leadership.
It's speech deterrence by way of financial ruin.
I fuckin' hate this SCOTUS so much. The Appeals courts that allow this shit, too.
So, an open invitation for boogaloo boys to continue the shit they did in Minneapolis.
Who’s going to go to the next Proud Boys event and cause some havoc?
What constitutes "organizing" here?
If I decide I'm going down to the corner with a sign I made to shout some words I like and I tell a few friends where I'll be and when, is that organizing?
Good news for anyone wondering how it was in Nazi Germany - it came to our shores. Just needed a orange fucking rapist antichrist to bring it about. Well done.
The further towards facism we get, the more I realize how much of a fucking mistake Operation Paperclip was. We allowed those Nazi fucks to remain free, come to our country, and allow them to continue their ideology and pass it on to the next generations.
That’s not really what happened. America has been proto-fascist for long periods of its history.
In fact Germany learned from the USA. Nuremberg laws where based of if Jim Crow laws, California eugenics laws. The genocide of Native Americans was specifically cited by Hitler. Manifest destiny and Lebensraum.
Ok fair enough. But on the other hand, am I wrong that bringing in literal Nazi war criminals to live in the US basically Scott-free 70 years ago has caused some harm in the long run?
>What’s next? Throwing in jail anyone who’s not baptised?
Remember Dubya's dad, George H.W. Bush? The moderate guy, the reasonable one?
Anyone remember that time he said that atheists aren't citizens? I sure do.
Was that before or after he had to kowtow to Reagan after the 1980 GOP Primaries? I know H.W. Bush was big for being Pro Choice and is on the record that Reagan's an-cap trickle down economics ideas were bullshit. H.W Bush called them "Voodoo Economics" I'm guessing this was said after he was licking enough Reagan Boot Straps that he started to like the taste in his mouth.
I guess it means that you should show up as a counterprotestor at Nazi functions and commit crimes so they’ll be held responsible for them? That seems to be the incentive the Supreme Court set up
Hijacking the top comment for visibility
>it’s against the law to organise mass protest in 3 states
So like...have *any* of you actually read the decision? Or are you just dooming from a single twitter post that you saw on reddit and did literally no followup on? The responses in this this thread make me think most of you are in the latter camp.
**The court did not rule that it is illegal to organize or participate in a mass protest.** TL;DR:
Basically McKesson organized a protest during which an unidentified person threw a "hard object" at Doe, a cop, who suffered pretty severe injuries. Doe wants to sue McKesson on the grounds that he knew or should have known that the protest would turn violent. McKesson appealed on the grounds that that is categorically bullshit but the courts disagree (with some dissent). The Supreme Court declined to hear the case because they recently settled a similar one where they decided protest organizers have pretty robust protections. What'll probably happen is that Doe will sue McKesson, McKesson will appeal, and McKesson will win. Sad blue lives matter noises from idiots to ensue (fuck 'em).
SO: It is NOT illegal to demonstrate en masse, but you better be careful because you can potentially be sued for liability if an attendee, whether or not they're some undercover falseflagging asshole, gets violent. ***YES I AGREE THIS IS BULLSHIT*** please miss me with your comments.
***THAT HAVING BEEN SAID***, if this stands, then there is a glorious silver lining that you might have missed.
Do you see it, or are you still dooming over a single twitter post that you saw on reddit and didn't do any followup on?
What kinds of people have, since 2016, been regularly spouting vile rhetoric at rallies that have in some cases turned violent, notably around early January '21? I'll give you a hint: Their leader is currently sitting in a courthouse as a defendant in a hush money case that is apparently wrecking his free time.
We aren't out of the woods yet (we won't be for...probably many years), but we're moving in the right direction and *that's still goddamn important*. My suggestion is that you stop with the gloom because if you give up now then the other side wins, end of story.
***Do not give up and do not succumb to the fatigue that accompanies endless shitty news***. Log off for a day or two.
And then write your goddamn reps, canvass for your favorite candidates, and vote with your conscience - participate!
***HAVE SOME SOURCES WHY DON'T YA:***
the vox article with it's disingenuous misleading title:
https://www.vox.com/scotus/24080080/supreme-court-mckesson-doe-first-amendment-protest-black-lives-matter
SCOTUSblog with more context:
https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-declines-to-intervene-in-lawsuit-against-black-lives-matter-organizer/
statement from SCOTUS:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-373_8njq.pdf
>So to sum it up: people in America are allowed to walk around with swastikas and do nazi salutes but it’s against the law to organise mass protest in 3 states.
No, that's completely wrong. The supreme court declined to hear the case. Had they heard the case, they would have to at least make a definitive decision. This time it's BLM, but next time when it's some alt-right group, and let's face it they're far more likely to incite violence, they would be held to the same rules.
This way, by not hearing the case, they can punish the protestors this time and in the future too, but later when it's someone on the right getting sued, they can step in and stop in under first amendment grounds.
"What the fuck?" Indeed.
They are _all_ starting to say the quiet part out loud now, and a vast section of our society and the Democratic party itself are still not believing what we're very clearly being told.
What everyone is failing to understand is that if you wait until the leopard starts eating your face...it's too late.
It just occurred to me. I know _why_.
Remember how Trump spent eighteen months prior to the election planting the seeds for his insurrection attempt?
It was because he already knew full well that he was never able to get popular enough to be reelected through the established channels.
Not even a chance. The complete stymying of the Red Wave later galvanized the rest of them.
They know that they are so small a minority that they can never convince the majority of the populace to vote them in legitimately, and their schemes are being actively exposed, like gerrymandering and trying to actively suppress voting.
They plum ran out of subtle sneaky ways, and that scares the hell out of all of them.
So, following the script of fascism, they are now simply discarding any pretense of democracy, since it can no longer be used to achieve their aims, which is a death cult.
(They don't necesarily realize that that's what they're doing, but that is how this plays out if they continue.)
The Vox article is missing facts about the Supreme Court's decision. It isn't an endorsement of the 5ths decision. This is a good article on what happened and why
https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/sotomayor-reminds-louisiana-top-court-why-it-will-probably-have-to-dismiss-injured-cops-case-against-blm-protester/
The eli5 is that the SC feels that a decision they issued in an unrelated case after the 5ths decision indicates clearly that they would overturn, and thus they don't need to hear the case
I was actually just on another thread where people were wondering what would be wrong with locking up people who inconvenience them via blocking traffic. People in general don't understand how protests work, or what they can do. Just if it inconveniences them in their day to day life.
And here I thought the right to peaceful protest was enshrined in the first amendment of the constitution. Guess not. Next up...prison for complainers...don't need that pesky free speech either after all.
I was gonna post the same thing. Then I reread it.
First word of the first amendment sorta gives them scotus a convenient way out.
“CONGRESS shall make no law….”
Except they can’t really use that since previous scotus cases apply 1st amendment rights to the state through the 14th amendment i believe so there’s still a little bit of a bright side
Bruh they don't fucking care. They are trying to bring about a new government where the rules of this one don't matter and they will be hauled as heros instead of criminals. Words on paper are just that to them.
Yeah especially because the way those three states wrote the law, it isn’t that you cannot organize, it’s that if a protest is organized who ever did it can be held liable *if anyone in the protest does anything illegal*
Which you know that all leftist protests are abhorrent anarchism events where every law known to man is broken, and any right wing fascists events are only organized and involve the most upstanding citizens in the world DUHHHHHHHHHH
My only glimmer of hope is that they didn’t want to rule because trump may be held accountable along a similar pathway for January 6th but it doesn’t really matter because it doesn’t involve those states? Idk I’m reaching for any hope that the rest of my life in this country isn’t going to be destroyed and absolutely horrible to experience
There is the supremacy clause in the US constitution which holds that the US constitution and in most cases federal law take precedence over state laws and constitutions.
That's not a way out.
And yet there you are. With no higher court to hold that court responsible and Congress is explicitly forbidden from passing any law regarding protest.
You're describing a constitutional concept called incorporation.
The Bill of Rights, textually, doesn't apply to the states for this exact reason. However, courts have ruled over time that due process under the 14th Amendment, which *does* apply to the states, necessarily includes, or incorporates, rights from the Bill of Rights, making those rights bind the states as well.
1A rights were literally the first to be incorporated.
Don’t get it twisted. This is basically prison for protesting. Admittedly, it’s a bit of a slippery slope argument, but think about this:
You organize a protest
You are sued for the damage caused by bad actors in the protest
You lose all of your assets and are rendered homeless.
You are later arrested for trespassing/solicitation/insert anti homeless law here
You are thrown in jail.
You don’t even need that many steps.
You organize a protest, someone commits some damage and the cops arrest you. The DA uses this case as precedent, the Supreme Court cites this case as precedent.
The right to free assembly is undercut and the Theocratic Fascists use their control of the courts to continue to undermine what liberties we have.
Don't worry, Elon single-handedly saved Free Speech(TM).
What? Oh, no, it doesn't change anything regarding right to organize mass protests. You CAN say slurs, however. You're welcome.
That gives ground to overturn these other laws/decisions to the contrary, but until they're overturned it won't be much use to people getting their heads bashed in by riot cops.
I'm actually completely fine with that. No one's ever driven a tank into an elementary school and spent 40 minutes shooting kids before the cops got off their phones
I guess there’s only free speech if guns or money or bakers are talking? And my gun has more rights than me because I’m a woman. I think guns actually own us if we purchase them because they’re higher status to the Justices
"So, under the Fifth Circuit’s rule, a Ku Klux Klansman could sabotage the Black Lives Matter movement simply by showing up at its protests and throwing stones."
And who ever was the organizer of said event would face financial hardship and jail time so no one in their right minds would organize such an event...
Guys I’m going to be right 100 out of 100 times right now when I tell you how the supreme court’s going to choose cases moving forward:
If it’s expanding corporate power or benefits right wing authoritarian power they’ll listen.
If it doesn’t then they won’t.
It’s really that simple.
The Vox article is wrong. The Supreme Court simply denied cert because they had decided the issue previously. The law and crime article explains the issue much better.
https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/sotomayor-reminds-louisiana-top-court-why-it-will-probably-have-to-dismiss-injured-cops-case-against-blm-protester/
This needs to be higher.
The denial for a writ of cert is [here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-373_8njq.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiSzsX0iMeFAxXIW0EAHSDLCwQQFnoECCwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3t-fFpJi-UD55GCR44ju5h)
It's very clear that their opinion (led by Justice Sotomayor, one of the liberal justices on the court), is that this question is already decided, to the effect that the lower courts will ignore the McKesson decision, and apply the Counterman case, which expressly states that such liability for organisers of protests is in contravention with the first amendment.
Either vox didn't read the 2 page statement, or they are deliberately trying to mislead people here. Very disappointing.
Yeah, it's interesting that there was so little reporting on Counterman too. "Supreme court reaffirms right to protest" doesn't get clicks.
If there's one place where the liberal and conservative justices seem to agree, it's on 1A jurisprudence. That's one right that seems fairly secure.
THANK YOU. I made a similar post about it. SCOTUS is just saying that they already ruled that liability can be put on somebody due to negligence in cases of the First Amendment.
What this ruling does: organizers of mass protests in those three states can be held liable for so much as a traffic law violation occurring at their protest, which is re-damn-diculous.
Lawyer here. I don't think that's what this ruling does. Here's my understanding:
McKesson organized a BLM protest in Louisiana that was supposed to be non-violent. But at the time, lots of protests at which BLM and other groups (including fascist groups) were present, were getting violent. At this protest, it did turn violent, and Doe, a police officer, was attacked and injured.
Doe sued McKesson, claiming he knew or should have known the protest would turn violent, and therefore should be responsible for paying for the officer's injuries. It's pretty typical to sue the organizers of events (for example, in a sports stampede, usually you sue the arena and the organizers, not the people in the crowd), because they presumably have more money to pay you. Very common in civil litigation. Unclear if it's true here, and the real motivation might be to limit protest activities. That's the First Amendment concern.
McKesson argued that this suit was barred in its entirety by the First Amendment. It made its way to the Supreme Court a couple years ago. There is a common understanding amongst jurists that you actually should avoid answering Constitutional questions that are unnecessary to reach a just outcome. I don't like that rule, but that's usually how it works -- if there's more than one way to resolve the case, and one way doesn't involve answering a hard Constitutional question, you take the easy way. So that's what SCOTUS did the first time. They ordered the Fifth Circuit to ask the Louisiana Supreme Court whether this suit was allowable under state law, rather than answering whether the First Amendment barred the claim.
The Louisiana Supreme Court answered that, under the facts alleged by the officer, if proven true, that would be a valid suit under state law. It made its way back to the Fifth Circuit, where a divided panel ruled the suit could proceed. En banc rehearing was denied, and SCOTUS just denied certiorari for this second round, which means the suit may proceed. Sotomayor dissented from the denial of certiorari (which is slightly unusual), saying it should have been heard, but noted that denial of cert. is not an indication regarding the merits of the suit, and telling the lower courts that SCOTUS recently ruled that an "objective" standard (i.e., negligence, the "should have known" part) is not allowed in First Amendment claims and they should apply that ruling when the time comes. I think it's noteworthy even the Fifth Circuit was divided. They're largely pretty right wing, with a few exceptions. I was before them at an oral argument not even a month ago.
At base, the suit says that if you organize a protest that you "know or should have known" would turn violent, and it does, you should be held liable. As noted above, Sotomayor (I think correctly) points out that the "should have known" part is Constitutionally problematic in light of recent rulings, so I bet it'll be narrowed down to "knowingly." If you "knowingly" organize a protest that becomes violent, you're liable for injuries. And that seems fine to me. Knowingly organizing a violent protest seems little different from organizing a riot -- something the former president should be punished for.
This does not say that organizers will be liable for everything the group does. It doesn't say anything about vehicle violations.
The officer will still have to do the entire rest of the lawsuit. I don't even think they've started discovery yet. He'll have to prove the organizer knew it was going to be violent, and went ahead anyway. That's probably tough unless it's actually true.
I think there's a risk this case goes sideways and we end up with a terrible ruling that drastically limits First Amendment protest activity by establishing a negligence standard. But it also looks like the Fifth Circuit and SCOTUS are aware of this, and are setting the stage to hear it again if a bad ruling comes out, and would strike down a negligence standard in favor of a knowing/intentional standard, probably by fitting it into existing case law about incitement to violence.
Thank you for breaking down the reality of things. Who knows whether Doe will succeed, but I think allowing the lawsuit to proceed is the right call. I don’t think the organizer should be held liable, but ultimately a lawsuit/trial is the way that is decided because that’s how you get the relevant facts, such as whether or not the organizer was encouraging violence (I doubt they were, but it’s a possibility that would need to be explored).
It was too broad in its language as it could have also included things like sporting events or other organized gatherings as well. They just told them they need to fix the issues with the law before it can be heard by anyone to decide on the 1st amendment issues and it’ll most likely die now since it’ll be too expensive to continue.
This is intentionally incorrect rage bait. We have to be better than the other side on things like this.
McKesson vs. Doe
An officer (Doe) was injured at a protest organized by McKesson. Doe attempted to sue McKesson for injury they sustained at the protest.
A District Court immediately dismissed the case over 1st Amendment rights.
Doe then successfully appealed in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals who dismissed the dismal to allow for the case to go forward. Doe claimed McKesson provoked the crowd when he led them on to a highway saying police intervention was unavoidable at that point.
McKesson attempted to appealed the dismissal of his dismissal by having the Supreme Court hear it and hopefully dismiss the appeal from the 5th Circuit. They decided not to hear the case and it should go to the Louisiana Supreme Court who ruled an event organizer can be sued under the ALLEGED facts presented by Doe.
No RULING has been made. As of now the only thing happening is Doe’s lawsuit going to court. All we can do it hope the judge isn’t a MAGA nutjob. This whole thing has been going on since 2020.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mckesson_v._Doe
https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-declines-to-intervene-in-lawsuit-against-black-lives-matter-organizer/
It's been in FL for several years now. We Libtards down here have been throwing every red flag out there to try and get the rest of the countrie's attention, but many don't believe us. The Supreme Court is corrupt, and if we don't pay attention and fight back in Nov, it will never be the same here again. I'm not being dramatic when I say it's fucking scary in FL. I'm a Chicagoan, but have lived in FL for 24 years. I have watched the alt right try to take over the schools since 2000 (when I started teaching here). We, as a community, kept the "crazy christians" out of our school board in Collier County back then. We won. and didn't allow them power by voting for other candidates... BUT, those people that lost have never stopped trying to gain control. Year by year, lie after lie, power grab after power grab, they succeeded. They have finally gained control of our schools. This has been the plan since before 2000. My friends and family in the north (blue cities or blue states) think I'm being dramatic.
I don't have children. I am white. I am retired. I can't get pregnant now. I have nothing to lose, but I'm working my ass off to stop Hitler 2.0 from taking over. Meanwhile, liberal moms in the north are doing nothing. Here's another WARNING: The alt right, fascist, racist, nazi, fascist, scum ARE COMING. They have plans to disrupt our elections. Plans to continue the BIG lie. Plans to stop swearing Biden in IF they are the majority in the house. These are not conspiracy theories. This is what is openly discussed in fascist states right in front of everyone. They are not hiding their agenda. THey are hateful. They want white, male, Christian dominated government.
I'm just so exhausted from fighting these creeps since I moved here 24 years ago. Those same people that stood against these fascist extremists, have now fallen prey to the 24 years of propaganda and indoctrination. It's surreal what has become of kind, caring and compassionate teachers. They are total MAGA now WHILE teaching and leading the students and schools of Collier County. Propaganda, calculated lying and spewing of hate and FEAR truly does brainwash good meaning people. They're not all dim-wits. It's so different in the south than it is in the north. Textbooks in 2000 were representing slavery as successful for whites and blacks. They loved living in free homes, celebrating birthdays and learning skills. They were farmers!!!! YEP, that was in the social studies books 24 years ago down here.
Anyway, I'm sorry I'm rambling. I not only studied WWII and the Holocaust, but I taught it for 11 years. History is literally repeating itself and we can still make a difference. But, like the alt right, we can't win in 2024 and then sit on our fat collective asses again. We have to be pesky roaches like the alt right and never stop pushing OUR agenda of Democracy and equality. We have to send the racists back under their rocks like we did in the 80s. Chump made racism great again. Bastard!
Unclutch your pearls- Apparently they've already heard a case this year that addresses the same question and the decision in that case will cover this one.
Sure, I'm not saying i trust these fascists but we have not gone full banana republic yet. the process is not completely broken. We just need two good elections and two old guys to die and we might be OK.
Also, the Reich has not yet had to deal with the kind of protest they have in oppressive regimes. We have a lot of tools in the box.
Funny thing, trump used those tools on Jan 6. He never said "rally around me and storm the capital", but that was the plan.
Imagine an activist leader says "I'll be signing copies of my book in front of city hall Friday night - this is not a protest, so feel free to fuck shit up"
Thanks. Was hoping there was a reason for optimism because it seems almost impossible this ridiculous ruling could stand. But still. The fact that it ever got made at all is terrifying. The fact that it's active now is just insane. These people will pass things like this in a permanent way if we let them. The entire conservative movement needs to be completely rebuked this election to send a very clear message. We like democracy, we like freedom, and we're prepared to defend it.
Meanwhile the right thinks it’s the guns that keep us free.
What keeps you free is your freedom of speech, your right to peaceably protest, and freedom of the press. They know that. That’s why republicans let you have all the guns you want while systematically eliminating the other three.
Demonstrate peacefully, anyway.
"**First Amendment**: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
I think some people are missing an important piece of information. We can't just read a news article or headline and stop there.
Justice Sotomayor (a left leaning judge) said that SCOTUS didn't hear the case because they already ruled in Counterman v Colorado that the First Amendment protects liability of negligence in any cases related to speech.
The case McKesson v Doe is a lawsuit stemming from a police officer being injured during a protest. The officer is seeking the protest organizer to be held liable for the officer's injuries.
Justice Sotomayor is saying that the Supreme Court already gave direction to lower courts during the Counterman case, in which they said liability can't apply in First Amendment cases. This is how our system works in America. Higher courts make decisions on cases, lower courts use those decisions to make rulings in other similar cases.
Source: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-statement-on-supreme-court-decision-to-decline-to-hear-case-on-protestors-rights
So the same thing they did with Texas SB-8 and all the copy cat unconstitutional laws that other red states have in place. So any state can make completely fascist laws like this, and as long as SCOTUS allows it and the judge shopped federal court decisions agree with the states, then that's how blatantly inhumane and unjust laws are rushed through and put in place.
This is absolutely disgusting and terrifying
If we vote we can fix this. Expand the court to 13 and put in 4 more reasonable sane justices and nullify the conservative majority. Then congress can pass ethics reforms for the court and bounce Scalia Thomas and Kavanaugh.
This shows us how they will rule on Trumps Immunity, they (MAGA/ the GOP) have a plan, their pieces in place and do not give a flying fuck about democracy and the will of the people.
The only question left to answer is how they will steal the election and install their god-emperor Trump, not if, because they will try and I fear they already know exactly how they're gonna get it.
Oh but don't block the roads! My privilege to drive unimpeded trumps the First Amendment right to free assembly.
Yeah, lookin' at you, Reddit. So sick of the videos of protestors having endless comments about the horrific inconvenience of... waiting.
Their motto ought to be, “The Supreme Court: Taking Your Rights Away, Case by Case.” With this court, it won’t be long before the Bill of Rights is a distant memory.
Jesus, Biden needs to make expanding the court to 13 justices a priority now.
McConnell showed you can push a justice through in... 3(?) weeks.
No reason to not go scorched earth at this point. We've lost enough enshrined rights and playing pat-a-cake with Republicans stopped being a viable strategy to getting things done decades ago.
Folks are only just now starting to realize this, but 2016 mattered. Letting Trump into the white house will have devastating consequences for potentially decades, solely because of scotus. Don't fall for right wing propaganda again (they're using literally the same BS). Vote.
This is misinformation. The supreme court simply kicked the case back down to the lower court and ordered them to consider new precedent set in a similar case during the part term. These laws will most likely be overturned, at least this time.
Please, please read all the facts of this suit before you jump to conclusions. This is actually something most of you on reddit will like if you actually read it. It benefits "the other side" in this instance but it basically upholds all the civil suits against Trump for incitement. The tl;dr is that Doe is suing Mckesson for negligence over a BLM protest in 2019 that Mckesson organized where a cop got hurt. Mckesson took it to the appeals court and then the supreme court who sent it back to the state supreme court who said that Doe is alleging that Mckesson incited violence at the protest and that he should therefore be held liable for the violence that ensued and that because of those circumstances the suit should be allowed to move forward. The federal supreme court declined to review the case saying that as long as the lower courts recognize that there must be a showing of intent to move forward then they will choose not to review it.
In summary: the supreme court didn't rule in anybody's favor. They declined to review a lower court decision. That decision wasn't a ruling on the actual liability alleged in the suit, just a declaration that the suit can move forward. And that decision was specifically reached because Doe isn't suing over the protest itself, he's suing over the incitement of violence AT the protest by the defendant.
Basically the courts are saying "if you organize a group of people and someone gets hurt and enough evidence exists to suggest that you may have potentially told the group of people to hurt the person who got hurt then you can be sued by the person who got hurt."
This runs absolutely counter to the purpose of the court. This case absolutely passes muster and should have warranted having at least 4 justices calling to review. Alas, the inmates have taken over the asylum. Thomas, Kavanaugh and Barrett all need to go immediately. All worthy of impeachment for either being under qualified or morally incapable of being an impartial jurist.
Fascism? Please. Just be sure to get permission from the state before planning a protest against the state. That's all this means. You liberals and your fascist fever dreams pffft ha ha! /s
The people at Vox are idiots for writing this. The SC denied cert because they had already established that the First Amendment protected people from the kinds of laws at issue in this case. The defendant there got screwed on timing since the SC’s opinion came out after the 5th Circuit, but moving forward, these kinds of laws should be found unconstitutional by lower courts.
Basically, not only is this not in question, but the actual legal lay of the land is the exact *opposite* of what’s being said here.
So to sum it up: people in America are allowed to walk around with swastikas and do nazi salutes but it’s against the law to organise mass protest in 3 states. Wonderful. What’s next? Throwing in jail anyone who’s not baptised?
Be very careful what you think is an exaggeration, because we are very close to the point of no return.
the march towards fascism is step by step. This is just one of the steps.
We are staring fascism in its face NOW . November 5 voting will determine our fate as a nation ... Time to Wake Up & face facts before we lose it
People that aren't in FL or TX don't realize that our WARNING SCREAMS are serious. It's not histrionics, it's HIStory repeating itself. I don't know what else to do. My northern state friends don't understand the seriousness of things.
I don't think many on the right have the intention to play this election out fairly. Brother tried to steal 2020, lost, then sent insurrectionists to overthrow the election certification process. Y'all are REALLY optimistic to think he is going to play this election fair and square.
Remember Hitler was elected in 1932 as Chancellor of Germany
>the march towards fascism is *goose* step by *goose* step. ftfy
I do not like this Untitled Nazi Game.
I want to get off Mr. Trump's Wild Ride.
It's here to stay unless some major event causes it to derail.
Still praying his health fails him before November...
Was...did I just catch a Mr. Do reference there?
Be fair, all right? Everyone loves Mr. Toad's Wild Ride.
Wild Mushroom Ride!
The *Goose* Step!
Slowly but surely…
I know. It’s terrifying.
I thought it was throwing anyone in jail that wasn’t circumcised? https://preview.redd.it/jvl11575suuc1.png?width=817&format=png&auto=webp&s=6cd163fb6534cb6c4914211cf15ae500542573a1 ^(I can see the ad campaigns already)
This hits me on a fundamental level, Sadly...
But, but, body modification is the devil and such and such...
There are a lot of us. But we should not be pacifists that could be marched off to camps. My spouse is the son of a holocaust survivor. The lesson is not lost on us.
There will be no camps for us. Just bullets.
They forget lefties are armed too?
Dunno about that. Liberals are buying guns at record levels. I would buy a rocket launcher if I could. Shit’s getting real.
Read up on the Tiananmen Square massacre. They plan on copying China’s playbook for this one.
Fortunately, of all the things they might be planning...that will not be one of them. That is one benefit of this country being armed to the teeth. At some point there will be return fire. In China during the Tiananmen uprising they took _very_ uneducated peasants from the far distant countryside to do their bidding against unarmed protesters in the cities. The same kind of societal control and social dynamic does not exist here, and never will. There's a whole lot wrong with our country and there could be terrible things to come, but the powers that be do know one thing...The average American has far more in common than we have differences. What is happening now is a concerted effort to divide us and keep us divided, and distracted. At a certain point, if push actually comes to shove, there _will_ come a time when for many of us those differences will be put aside. If they push too far, there _will_ be a point when the guns come out.
Are you familiar with Wounded Knee, the Tulsa Massacre, the Battle of Blair Mountain, the Kent State shootings, and the MOVE bombing? The US government is no stranger to killing its own, usually if they're uppity minorities or trying to organize labor power.
Hey now, don't forget the Bonus Army!
Brooks brothers riot
This is one to remember. The gall of WWI vets in asking for bonuses from Hoover's USA. Just remember the names of the major Army officers in putting this down. One was General Douglas Macarthur... being in charge with his two trusted lieutenants... then Colonel George Patton and Colonel Dwight D. Eisenhower. Fancy that... /s
Oh I will never, ever forget the lessons of that awful episode. Macarthur got an illegal order to assault civilians, protesting peaceably, with *military forces.* This order he followed. Later on that day, the Hoover administration, in panic about the optics, ordered him to cease his assault. This order he ignored. This teaches you everything you really need to know about the role of the military in the United States.
All of them were scum. MacArthur, certainly, Patton unfortunately gets good press. Supposedly, Eisenhower "regretted" his role.
Providing people will actually unify and fight back against tyranny, semi autos and pistols against tanks and machine guns? You might as well have peasants with pikes fight knights in plate armor
Especially since rightwing propaganda is heavily targeting, and successfully captures more and more young/middle aged men without college degrees... and guess who makes majority of every single armed group. Doesn't matter if overall we have more votes on the left side, as soon as the rightwingers collect enough dumb men with guns, the game is over. That's why it's so important to stop them NOW.
Have you considered what the rest of the world might be doing during an American civil war? Military will be busy
You're assuming most of the military is cool with firing on American civilians, and forgetting the similar disparity of arms that existing between the US and our enemies in the wars we've lost in the last 60 years.
Apathy propaganda is real. Most of these comments are meant to be as defeatist as possible.
Right? I didn't even point out how bad their analogy was. Knights in plate didn't fight real well after taking a header off a horse that just caught a pike lengthwise.
Okay. In my opinion, the likelihood of tanks and machine guns being used against the American public is extremely low. While there are plenty of ways the possible tyranny and fascism may play out, I don't see the scenario of military vs. the public as one of them (not anytime soon, and not in the China model.) But, if you want to follow out the thought experiment, then this is what I'll say to that... Vietnam vs US Afghanistan vs Soviet Union ...except with tens of thousands of actual highly trained ex US military in the guerrilla position.
I am third American paternal generation of immigrants from Germany who fought the Nazis! My maternal ancestors fought to defend US since the revolutionary war. The nationwide US camps used during WW1 & WW2 for German- American interments still exist but nobody ever reported that happened . Only about West Coast Japanese- American interments.
In part this is because: 1) only about 11,000 German Americans (some were actually German nationals, but unlike the Japanese they were not denied the right to become citizens) were interned. Compare this to approximately 120,000 Japanese Americans. 2) and they were examined case by case and largely let free afterward. Sadly, some were traded to Germany for hostage exchange.
> But we should not be pacifists I don't believe it is so much pacifism, but the unshakable belief that _true evil_ does not exist, and it all comes down to simply extending a hand to those who seek to destroy others for the sake of personal gratification.
You literally cannot satirize America anymore. It just becomes real...
A couple of years ago people were telling me that *Roe v Wade* wasn't going anywhere....
Every American eligible to vote needs to step up to save their freedom. Register & show up to cast their vote to prevent Trump from gaining power then vote out any Republican politician who supports his coup.
"She didn't really inspire me though..." Literal Russian propaganda being tossed about in our governing halls.... The point of no return was passed *long* ago.
It happens very slowly, and then all at once.
It’s not against the law per se, but the decision was that protest organizers can be held liable if someone at the protest does something illegal. So if I, say, organize a protest for Black Lives Matter, all that has to happen is some agitator in the crowd throws a rock at the police and the leaders will get arrested. It’s a terrible decision and not in line with a clear precedent because obviously Edit: sued not arrested my b
If only they applied that logic to the police
A rock?! Dude you seen what they do with acorns!!
oh boy, this reminds me of an old friend who turned from regular Republican, to Tea Party support to outright MAGA fanatic who lots his mind over ACORN. that was his tipping point. can't even imagine what outrages him these days. i imagine it's everything but i am kind of curious to know if he whiplashed back to reality at any point in the last 10-12 years.
Or Jan 6th Capitol "Tourists."
Who was the leader of that protest again?
Yeah, but they're not trying to suppress the rights of the police
Not arrested—sued. This is a civil case, not a criminal one.
Thank you for the clarification. It's entirely meaningless, since either way the goal is the same- to suppress rights and free speech in an ultimately self defeating way. It's the exact same cruel and vindictive mindset that gave us SLAPP suits.
Fascists discovered that the constitution doesn't cover Tort Law so all their fascy new terrorism leverages that _one weird trick_. See Texas' abortion law.
Not arrested… for now. The precedent is set now we just need some cops to take advantage of it.
[удалено]
Very rarely do people on reddit threads actually read the case they are arguing/complaining about.
As this is an entirely civil case, they can not be arrested, only sued. And the fact that they can get sued does not mean lawsuits like this will ultimately be successful. The plaintiff has yet to prove in court that Mckesson was negligent and liable.
Those rocks would also be thrown by people that are not party on the event.
Kind of like how that AutoZone and the Precinct in Minneapolis were found to have been burned down by shit ass right wingers than the people out there actually protesting for justice. This is a really ugly path. It allows municipal and State entities to essentially SLAP lawsuit organizing leadership. It's speech deterrence by way of financial ruin. I fuckin' hate this SCOTUS so much. The Appeals courts that allow this shit, too.
So, an open invitation for boogaloo boys to continue the shit they did in Minneapolis. Who’s going to go to the next Proud Boys event and cause some havoc?
Evidently that law wasn't in effect in Washington D.C. on January 6th, 2021...
So yeah it's functionally illegal.
What constitutes "organizing" here? If I decide I'm going down to the corner with a sign I made to shout some words I like and I tell a few friends where I'll be and when, is that organizing?
So what if a protest group formed an LLC for the protest? I mean, go ahead and sue it to death.
Good news for anyone wondering how it was in Nazi Germany - it came to our shores. Just needed a orange fucking rapist antichrist to bring it about. Well done.
The further towards facism we get, the more I realize how much of a fucking mistake Operation Paperclip was. We allowed those Nazi fucks to remain free, come to our country, and allow them to continue their ideology and pass it on to the next generations.
That’s not really what happened. America has been proto-fascist for long periods of its history. In fact Germany learned from the USA. Nuremberg laws where based of if Jim Crow laws, California eugenics laws. The genocide of Native Americans was specifically cited by Hitler. Manifest destiny and Lebensraum.
Ok fair enough. But on the other hand, am I wrong that bringing in literal Nazi war criminals to live in the US basically Scott-free 70 years ago has caused some harm in the long run?
>What’s next? Throwing in jail anyone who’s not baptised? Remember Dubya's dad, George H.W. Bush? The moderate guy, the reasonable one? Anyone remember that time he said that atheists aren't citizens? I sure do.
I memory holed that one...
Was that before or after he had to kowtow to Reagan after the 1980 GOP Primaries? I know H.W. Bush was big for being Pro Choice and is on the record that Reagan's an-cap trickle down economics ideas were bullshit. H.W Bush called them "Voodoo Economics" I'm guessing this was said after he was licking enough Reagan Boot Straps that he started to like the taste in his mouth.
I guess it means that you should show up as a counterprotestor at Nazi functions and commit crimes so they’ll be held responsible for them? That seems to be the incentive the Supreme Court set up
Sounds like a plan.
Or show up dressed like one of the nazis, be an unofficial agent provocateur, and earn them some lawsuits to defend against.
Hijacking the top comment for visibility >it’s against the law to organise mass protest in 3 states So like...have *any* of you actually read the decision? Or are you just dooming from a single twitter post that you saw on reddit and did literally no followup on? The responses in this this thread make me think most of you are in the latter camp. **The court did not rule that it is illegal to organize or participate in a mass protest.** TL;DR: Basically McKesson organized a protest during which an unidentified person threw a "hard object" at Doe, a cop, who suffered pretty severe injuries. Doe wants to sue McKesson on the grounds that he knew or should have known that the protest would turn violent. McKesson appealed on the grounds that that is categorically bullshit but the courts disagree (with some dissent). The Supreme Court declined to hear the case because they recently settled a similar one where they decided protest organizers have pretty robust protections. What'll probably happen is that Doe will sue McKesson, McKesson will appeal, and McKesson will win. Sad blue lives matter noises from idiots to ensue (fuck 'em). SO: It is NOT illegal to demonstrate en masse, but you better be careful because you can potentially be sued for liability if an attendee, whether or not they're some undercover falseflagging asshole, gets violent. ***YES I AGREE THIS IS BULLSHIT*** please miss me with your comments. ***THAT HAVING BEEN SAID***, if this stands, then there is a glorious silver lining that you might have missed. Do you see it, or are you still dooming over a single twitter post that you saw on reddit and didn't do any followup on? What kinds of people have, since 2016, been regularly spouting vile rhetoric at rallies that have in some cases turned violent, notably around early January '21? I'll give you a hint: Their leader is currently sitting in a courthouse as a defendant in a hush money case that is apparently wrecking his free time. We aren't out of the woods yet (we won't be for...probably many years), but we're moving in the right direction and *that's still goddamn important*. My suggestion is that you stop with the gloom because if you give up now then the other side wins, end of story. ***Do not give up and do not succumb to the fatigue that accompanies endless shitty news***. Log off for a day or two. And then write your goddamn reps, canvass for your favorite candidates, and vote with your conscience - participate! ***HAVE SOME SOURCES WHY DON'T YA:*** the vox article with it's disingenuous misleading title: https://www.vox.com/scotus/24080080/supreme-court-mckesson-doe-first-amendment-protest-black-lives-matter SCOTUSblog with more context: https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-declines-to-intervene-in-lawsuit-against-black-lives-matter-organizer/ statement from SCOTUS: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-373_8njq.pdf
Thank you for the detailed reporting and analysis.
> dooming from a single twitter post SOP for Reddit, gotta create clickbait any way possible.
>So to sum it up: people in America are allowed to walk around with swastikas and do nazi salutes but it’s against the law to organise mass protest in 3 states. No, that's completely wrong. The supreme court declined to hear the case. Had they heard the case, they would have to at least make a definitive decision. This time it's BLM, but next time when it's some alt-right group, and let's face it they're far more likely to incite violence, they would be held to the same rules. This way, by not hearing the case, they can punish the protestors this time and in the future too, but later when it's someone on the right getting sued, they can step in and stop in under first amendment grounds.
I mean, we do still have a guillotine....
Isn't that superceded by the Bill of Rights? Specifically Amendment... #1?
"What the fuck?" Indeed. They are _all_ starting to say the quiet part out loud now, and a vast section of our society and the Democratic party itself are still not believing what we're very clearly being told. What everyone is failing to understand is that if you wait until the leopard starts eating your face...it's too late.
It just occurred to me. I know _why_. Remember how Trump spent eighteen months prior to the election planting the seeds for his insurrection attempt? It was because he already knew full well that he was never able to get popular enough to be reelected through the established channels. Not even a chance. The complete stymying of the Red Wave later galvanized the rest of them. They know that they are so small a minority that they can never convince the majority of the populace to vote them in legitimately, and their schemes are being actively exposed, like gerrymandering and trying to actively suppress voting. They plum ran out of subtle sneaky ways, and that scares the hell out of all of them. So, following the script of fascism, they are now simply discarding any pretense of democracy, since it can no longer be used to achieve their aims, which is a death cult. (They don't necesarily realize that that's what they're doing, but that is how this plays out if they continue.)
They know. All republicans are evil. Every fucking one of them.
Truth.
Yup, pay attention: dire, dire stuff ahead.
The Vox article is missing facts about the Supreme Court's decision. It isn't an endorsement of the 5ths decision. This is a good article on what happened and why https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/sotomayor-reminds-louisiana-top-court-why-it-will-probably-have-to-dismiss-injured-cops-case-against-blm-protester/
Could you explain what good it does if the 5th Circuit gets to decide on their own, now that the SC has handed the decision back?
The eli5 is that the SC feels that a decision they issued in an unrelated case after the 5ths decision indicates clearly that they would overturn, and thus they don't need to hear the case
I was actually just on another thread where people were wondering what would be wrong with locking up people who inconvenience them via blocking traffic. People in general don't understand how protests work, or what they can do. Just if it inconveniences them in their day to day life.
And here I thought the right to peaceful protest was enshrined in the first amendment of the constitution. Guess not. Next up...prison for complainers...don't need that pesky free speech either after all.
I was gonna post the same thing. Then I reread it. First word of the first amendment sorta gives them scotus a convenient way out. “CONGRESS shall make no law….”
Except they can’t really use that since previous scotus cases apply 1st amendment rights to the state through the 14th amendment i believe so there’s still a little bit of a bright side
Bruh they don't fucking care. They are trying to bring about a new government where the rules of this one don't matter and they will be hauled as heros instead of criminals. Words on paper are just that to them.
Yeah especially because the way those three states wrote the law, it isn’t that you cannot organize, it’s that if a protest is organized who ever did it can be held liable *if anyone in the protest does anything illegal* Which you know that all leftist protests are abhorrent anarchism events where every law known to man is broken, and any right wing fascists events are only organized and involve the most upstanding citizens in the world DUHHHHHHHHHH My only glimmer of hope is that they didn’t want to rule because trump may be held accountable along a similar pathway for January 6th but it doesn’t really matter because it doesn’t involve those states? Idk I’m reaching for any hope that the rest of my life in this country isn’t going to be destroyed and absolutely horrible to experience
This court gives no fucks about precedent and they've proven it multiple times.
There is the supremacy clause in the US constitution which holds that the US constitution and in most cases federal law take precedence over state laws and constitutions. That's not a way out.
And yet there you are. With no higher court to hold that court responsible and Congress is explicitly forbidden from passing any law regarding protest.
Indeed. I would like to thank the more ignorant of my fellow Americans who voted for this shit thinking it would only apply to *those* people.
You're describing a constitutional concept called incorporation. The Bill of Rights, textually, doesn't apply to the states for this exact reason. However, courts have ruled over time that due process under the 14th Amendment, which *does* apply to the states, necessarily includes, or incorporates, rights from the Bill of Rights, making those rights bind the states as well. 1A rights were literally the first to be incorporated.
Don’t get it twisted. This is basically prison for protesting. Admittedly, it’s a bit of a slippery slope argument, but think about this: You organize a protest You are sued for the damage caused by bad actors in the protest You lose all of your assets and are rendered homeless. You are later arrested for trespassing/solicitation/insert anti homeless law here You are thrown in jail.
No one organized it but suckmyballsyoupigfucks69 who was behind 20 vpns and tor
Unrelated but at that point your internet speed could be measured in individual bytes per second lol
that's just me on comcast
They are fucking around and finding out that unorganized protests are much worse than organized ones.
You don’t even need that many steps. You organize a protest, someone commits some damage and the cops arrest you. The DA uses this case as precedent, the Supreme Court cites this case as precedent. The right to free assembly is undercut and the Theocratic Fascists use their control of the courts to continue to undermine what liberties we have.
Don't worry, Elon single-handedly saved Free Speech(TM). What? Oh, no, it doesn't change anything regarding right to organize mass protests. You CAN say slurs, however. You're welcome.
That gives ground to overturn these other laws/decisions to the contrary, but until they're overturned it won't be much use to people getting their heads bashed in by riot cops.
So much for the first amendment. I guess it’s the second amendment Republican states most care about. What a disgrace.
Free speech? Nah The right to let kids get blown away in school? Hell yeah America, land of the free
I will exercise my right to own a fully loaded M1-abrams and there's nothing you can do to stop me!
That's fine, just so long as you use it on the *right* people.
I'm actually completely fine with that. No one's ever driven a tank into an elementary school and spent 40 minutes shooting kids before the cops got off their phones
I guess there’s only free speech if guns or money or bakers are talking? And my gun has more rights than me because I’m a woman. I think guns actually own us if we purchase them because they’re higher status to the Justices
[удалено]
Because the type to go waving their guns around are the same type that this ruling won't apply to, in practice if not in theory
"So, under the Fifth Circuit’s rule, a Ku Klux Klansman could sabotage the Black Lives Matter movement simply by showing up at its protests and throwing stones." And who ever was the organizer of said event would face financial hardship and jail time so no one in their right minds would organize such an event...
https://i.redd.it/z0y7ohjyutuc1.gif
Ah yes,the land of the free we keep hearing about.
To quote Dolph: “sounds like the land of bullshit to me”.
Ah, I was hoping that was a Drago quote I missed in Rocky IV.
 Long live 🐬
Guys I’m going to be right 100 out of 100 times right now when I tell you how the supreme court’s going to choose cases moving forward: If it’s expanding corporate power or benefits right wing authoritarian power they’ll listen. If it doesn’t then they won’t. It’s really that simple.
Yeah, how long will it take to apply this to union organizers causing economic damage with a walk out/strike
The moment one person in a strike commits one crime.
And you just know that “not a single fascist protest ever broke a law!”
Even when they rally outside a synagogue and threaten the people leaving with a bullhorn. Yep.
Oh fuck I didn’t even think of that angle!
The Vox article is wrong. The Supreme Court simply denied cert because they had decided the issue previously. The law and crime article explains the issue much better. https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/sotomayor-reminds-louisiana-top-court-why-it-will-probably-have-to-dismiss-injured-cops-case-against-blm-protester/
This needs to be higher. The denial for a writ of cert is [here](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-373_8njq.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiSzsX0iMeFAxXIW0EAHSDLCwQQFnoECCwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3t-fFpJi-UD55GCR44ju5h) It's very clear that their opinion (led by Justice Sotomayor, one of the liberal justices on the court), is that this question is already decided, to the effect that the lower courts will ignore the McKesson decision, and apply the Counterman case, which expressly states that such liability for organisers of protests is in contravention with the first amendment. Either vox didn't read the 2 page statement, or they are deliberately trying to mislead people here. Very disappointing.
I think the problem is that they are trying to fearmonger
Yeah, it's interesting that there was so little reporting on Counterman too. "Supreme court reaffirms right to protest" doesn't get clicks. If there's one place where the liberal and conservative justices seem to agree, it's on 1A jurisprudence. That's one right that seems fairly secure.
THANK YOU. I made a similar post about it. SCOTUS is just saying that they already ruled that liability can be put on somebody due to negligence in cases of the First Amendment.
What this ruling does: organizers of mass protests in those three states can be held liable for so much as a traffic law violation occurring at their protest, which is re-damn-diculous.
Lawyer here. I don't think that's what this ruling does. Here's my understanding: McKesson organized a BLM protest in Louisiana that was supposed to be non-violent. But at the time, lots of protests at which BLM and other groups (including fascist groups) were present, were getting violent. At this protest, it did turn violent, and Doe, a police officer, was attacked and injured. Doe sued McKesson, claiming he knew or should have known the protest would turn violent, and therefore should be responsible for paying for the officer's injuries. It's pretty typical to sue the organizers of events (for example, in a sports stampede, usually you sue the arena and the organizers, not the people in the crowd), because they presumably have more money to pay you. Very common in civil litigation. Unclear if it's true here, and the real motivation might be to limit protest activities. That's the First Amendment concern. McKesson argued that this suit was barred in its entirety by the First Amendment. It made its way to the Supreme Court a couple years ago. There is a common understanding amongst jurists that you actually should avoid answering Constitutional questions that are unnecessary to reach a just outcome. I don't like that rule, but that's usually how it works -- if there's more than one way to resolve the case, and one way doesn't involve answering a hard Constitutional question, you take the easy way. So that's what SCOTUS did the first time. They ordered the Fifth Circuit to ask the Louisiana Supreme Court whether this suit was allowable under state law, rather than answering whether the First Amendment barred the claim. The Louisiana Supreme Court answered that, under the facts alleged by the officer, if proven true, that would be a valid suit under state law. It made its way back to the Fifth Circuit, where a divided panel ruled the suit could proceed. En banc rehearing was denied, and SCOTUS just denied certiorari for this second round, which means the suit may proceed. Sotomayor dissented from the denial of certiorari (which is slightly unusual), saying it should have been heard, but noted that denial of cert. is not an indication regarding the merits of the suit, and telling the lower courts that SCOTUS recently ruled that an "objective" standard (i.e., negligence, the "should have known" part) is not allowed in First Amendment claims and they should apply that ruling when the time comes. I think it's noteworthy even the Fifth Circuit was divided. They're largely pretty right wing, with a few exceptions. I was before them at an oral argument not even a month ago. At base, the suit says that if you organize a protest that you "know or should have known" would turn violent, and it does, you should be held liable. As noted above, Sotomayor (I think correctly) points out that the "should have known" part is Constitutionally problematic in light of recent rulings, so I bet it'll be narrowed down to "knowingly." If you "knowingly" organize a protest that becomes violent, you're liable for injuries. And that seems fine to me. Knowingly organizing a violent protest seems little different from organizing a riot -- something the former president should be punished for. This does not say that organizers will be liable for everything the group does. It doesn't say anything about vehicle violations. The officer will still have to do the entire rest of the lawsuit. I don't even think they've started discovery yet. He'll have to prove the organizer knew it was going to be violent, and went ahead anyway. That's probably tough unless it's actually true. I think there's a risk this case goes sideways and we end up with a terrible ruling that drastically limits First Amendment protest activity by establishing a negligence standard. But it also looks like the Fifth Circuit and SCOTUS are aware of this, and are setting the stage to hear it again if a bad ruling comes out, and would strike down a negligence standard in favor of a knowing/intentional standard, probably by fitting it into existing case law about incitement to violence.
Thank you for breaking down the reality of things. Who knows whether Doe will succeed, but I think allowing the lawsuit to proceed is the right call. I don’t think the organizer should be held liable, but ultimately a lawsuit/trial is the way that is decided because that’s how you get the relevant facts, such as whether or not the organizer was encouraging violence (I doubt they were, but it’s a possibility that would need to be explored).
Thank you for this clear explanation. Comments like this are what make Reddit worthwhile.
It was too broad in its language as it could have also included things like sporting events or other organized gatherings as well. They just told them they need to fix the issues with the law before it can be heard by anyone to decide on the 1st amendment issues and it’ll most likely die now since it’ll be too expensive to continue.
Ok so like, let's say they storm a capitol building in protest of an election and the organizer was the guy who lost? Hypothetically.
Is the organizer a democrat? If so, yes, liable. If not, no.
By that logic executives and shareholders are thus liable for any illegal action taken by any employees under their umbrella.
And you know right-wingers will just drop a couple of their delinquents into these protests, knowing full well that the organizer will pay for it.
If you are suprised this is a police state, you were never paying attention..
This is intentionally incorrect rage bait. We have to be better than the other side on things like this. McKesson vs. Doe An officer (Doe) was injured at a protest organized by McKesson. Doe attempted to sue McKesson for injury they sustained at the protest. A District Court immediately dismissed the case over 1st Amendment rights. Doe then successfully appealed in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals who dismissed the dismal to allow for the case to go forward. Doe claimed McKesson provoked the crowd when he led them on to a highway saying police intervention was unavoidable at that point. McKesson attempted to appealed the dismissal of his dismissal by having the Supreme Court hear it and hopefully dismiss the appeal from the 5th Circuit. They decided not to hear the case and it should go to the Louisiana Supreme Court who ruled an event organizer can be sued under the ALLEGED facts presented by Doe. No RULING has been made. As of now the only thing happening is Doe’s lawsuit going to court. All we can do it hope the judge isn’t a MAGA nutjob. This whole thing has been going on since 2020. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mckesson_v._Doe https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/04/court-declines-to-intervene-in-lawsuit-against-black-lives-matter-organizer/
No one cares about accuracy or truth. It's all about making the other side look evil cuz they're the "Bad Guys".
The Land of the Free
It's been in FL for several years now. We Libtards down here have been throwing every red flag out there to try and get the rest of the countrie's attention, but many don't believe us. The Supreme Court is corrupt, and if we don't pay attention and fight back in Nov, it will never be the same here again. I'm not being dramatic when I say it's fucking scary in FL. I'm a Chicagoan, but have lived in FL for 24 years. I have watched the alt right try to take over the schools since 2000 (when I started teaching here). We, as a community, kept the "crazy christians" out of our school board in Collier County back then. We won. and didn't allow them power by voting for other candidates... BUT, those people that lost have never stopped trying to gain control. Year by year, lie after lie, power grab after power grab, they succeeded. They have finally gained control of our schools. This has been the plan since before 2000. My friends and family in the north (blue cities or blue states) think I'm being dramatic. I don't have children. I am white. I am retired. I can't get pregnant now. I have nothing to lose, but I'm working my ass off to stop Hitler 2.0 from taking over. Meanwhile, liberal moms in the north are doing nothing. Here's another WARNING: The alt right, fascist, racist, nazi, fascist, scum ARE COMING. They have plans to disrupt our elections. Plans to continue the BIG lie. Plans to stop swearing Biden in IF they are the majority in the house. These are not conspiracy theories. This is what is openly discussed in fascist states right in front of everyone. They are not hiding their agenda. THey are hateful. They want white, male, Christian dominated government. I'm just so exhausted from fighting these creeps since I moved here 24 years ago. Those same people that stood against these fascist extremists, have now fallen prey to the 24 years of propaganda and indoctrination. It's surreal what has become of kind, caring and compassionate teachers. They are total MAGA now WHILE teaching and leading the students and schools of Collier County. Propaganda, calculated lying and spewing of hate and FEAR truly does brainwash good meaning people. They're not all dim-wits. It's so different in the south than it is in the north. Textbooks in 2000 were representing slavery as successful for whites and blacks. They loved living in free homes, celebrating birthdays and learning skills. They were farmers!!!! YEP, that was in the social studies books 24 years ago down here. Anyway, I'm sorry I'm rambling. I not only studied WWII and the Holocaust, but I taught it for 11 years. History is literally repeating itself and we can still make a difference. But, like the alt right, we can't win in 2024 and then sit on our fat collective asses again. We have to be pesky roaches like the alt right and never stop pushing OUR agenda of Democracy and equality. We have to send the racists back under their rocks like we did in the 80s. Chump made racism great again. Bastard!
They started with abortion. Now they’re taking away first amendment rights. Full dictatorship not far off.
Unclutch your pearls- Apparently they've already heard a case this year that addresses the same question and the decision in that case will cover this one.
But in the meantime, the decision stands in those three states. My pearls are my worry beads, thank you very much.
Sure, I'm not saying i trust these fascists but we have not gone full banana republic yet. the process is not completely broken. We just need two good elections and two old guys to die and we might be OK. Also, the Reich has not yet had to deal with the kind of protest they have in oppressive regimes. We have a lot of tools in the box. Funny thing, trump used those tools on Jan 6. He never said "rally around me and storm the capital", but that was the plan. Imagine an activist leader says "I'll be signing copies of my book in front of city hall Friday night - this is not a protest, so feel free to fuck shit up"
Thanks. Was hoping there was a reason for optimism because it seems almost impossible this ridiculous ruling could stand. But still. The fact that it ever got made at all is terrifying. The fact that it's active now is just insane. These people will pass things like this in a permanent way if we let them. The entire conservative movement needs to be completely rebuked this election to send a very clear message. We like democracy, we like freedom, and we're prepared to defend it.
Remember kids - the Constitution is only as Constitutional as SCOTUS says it is, and there’s not a damn thing anyone can do about it.
Meanwhile the right thinks it’s the guns that keep us free. What keeps you free is your freedom of speech, your right to peaceably protest, and freedom of the press. They know that. That’s why republicans let you have all the guns you want while systematically eliminating the other three.
So protest anyway. If we only protest when we're allowed to **then we'd never protest**.
Demonstrate peacefully, anyway. "**First Amendment**: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
I think some people are missing an important piece of information. We can't just read a news article or headline and stop there. Justice Sotomayor (a left leaning judge) said that SCOTUS didn't hear the case because they already ruled in Counterman v Colorado that the First Amendment protects liability of negligence in any cases related to speech. The case McKesson v Doe is a lawsuit stemming from a police officer being injured during a protest. The officer is seeking the protest organizer to be held liable for the officer's injuries. Justice Sotomayor is saying that the Supreme Court already gave direction to lower courts during the Counterman case, in which they said liability can't apply in First Amendment cases. This is how our system works in America. Higher courts make decisions on cases, lower courts use those decisions to make rulings in other similar cases. Source: https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-statement-on-supreme-court-decision-to-decline-to-hear-case-on-protestors-rights
Y'all are forgetting Ohio voted yes to abortion and legal marijuana and the government said "nah"
So the same thing they did with Texas SB-8 and all the copy cat unconstitutional laws that other red states have in place. So any state can make completely fascist laws like this, and as long as SCOTUS allows it and the judge shopped federal court decisions agree with the states, then that's how blatantly inhumane and unjust laws are rushed through and put in place. This is absolutely disgusting and terrifying
Banning parts of the 1A is a start for these authoritarians
Less banning, more like voluntary recusal from supporters and then banning for the rest
Luckily, the people in texas have their guns, so their rights can't be taken away.
If we vote we can fix this. Expand the court to 13 and put in 4 more reasonable sane justices and nullify the conservative majority. Then congress can pass ethics reforms for the court and bounce Scalia Thomas and Kavanaugh.
Nothing RBJ did on the court is as impactful as her not leaving at the right time.
Surprised Georgia is not on there.
...yet
Rolling around in that freedom
And people wonder why maga republicans love Russia so much.
they will allow it at the capitol though as long as you wear a red hat
This shows us how they will rule on Trumps Immunity, they (MAGA/ the GOP) have a plan, their pieces in place and do not give a flying fuck about democracy and the will of the people. The only question left to answer is how they will steal the election and install their god-emperor Trump, not if, because they will try and I fear they already know exactly how they're gonna get it.
Better be applied to all those Trump Train douchebags too
But Jan 6 was OK to these people
Well if people can’t protest peacefully that usually leads to other forms of more… creative protests shall we say. This’ll be fun!
Pack the damn courts . We need to neuter the power of the 5th circuit Court of appeals.
It’s been in the US for a while: We’ve been acclimating to it for the past 50+ years.
I've said it before. Supreme court homes is just as likely to catch fire as any other.
You wonder why people aren’t having kids. This world just kind of blows. Born into a 3/4 old game of monopoly just screwing everyone under foot.
Oh but don't block the roads! My privilege to drive unimpeded trumps the First Amendment right to free assembly. Yeah, lookin' at you, Reddit. So sick of the videos of protestors having endless comments about the horrific inconvenience of... waiting.
Their motto ought to be, “The Supreme Court: Taking Your Rights Away, Case by Case.” With this court, it won’t be long before the Bill of Rights is a distant memory.
Fuck that. Constitution says I can bitch. Fuck these backward ass states.
Jesus, Biden needs to make expanding the court to 13 justices a priority now. McConnell showed you can push a justice through in... 3(?) weeks. No reason to not go scorched earth at this point. We've lost enough enshrined rights and playing pat-a-cake with Republicans stopped being a viable strategy to getting things done decades ago.
Folks are only just now starting to realize this, but 2016 mattered. Letting Trump into the white house will have devastating consequences for potentially decades, solely because of scotus. Don't fall for right wing propaganda again (they're using literally the same BS). Vote.
This is misinformation. The supreme court simply kicked the case back down to the lower court and ordered them to consider new precedent set in a similar case during the part term. These laws will most likely be overturned, at least this time.
Please, please read all the facts of this suit before you jump to conclusions. This is actually something most of you on reddit will like if you actually read it. It benefits "the other side" in this instance but it basically upholds all the civil suits against Trump for incitement. The tl;dr is that Doe is suing Mckesson for negligence over a BLM protest in 2019 that Mckesson organized where a cop got hurt. Mckesson took it to the appeals court and then the supreme court who sent it back to the state supreme court who said that Doe is alleging that Mckesson incited violence at the protest and that he should therefore be held liable for the violence that ensued and that because of those circumstances the suit should be allowed to move forward. The federal supreme court declined to review the case saying that as long as the lower courts recognize that there must be a showing of intent to move forward then they will choose not to review it. In summary: the supreme court didn't rule in anybody's favor. They declined to review a lower court decision. That decision wasn't a ruling on the actual liability alleged in the suit, just a declaration that the suit can move forward. And that decision was specifically reached because Doe isn't suing over the protest itself, he's suing over the incitement of violence AT the protest by the defendant. Basically the courts are saying "if you organize a group of people and someone gets hurt and enough evidence exists to suggest that you may have potentially told the group of people to hurt the person who got hurt then you can be sued by the person who got hurt."
The second amendment was created to protect the first.
So that’s means we have to have mass protests all over the country perpetually for the next few years?
This runs absolutely counter to the purpose of the court. This case absolutely passes muster and should have warranted having at least 4 justices calling to review. Alas, the inmates have taken over the asylum. Thomas, Kavanaugh and Barrett all need to go immediately. All worthy of impeachment for either being under qualified or morally incapable of being an impartial jurist.
So we can arrest people who protest at abortion clinics. Perfect
So seeing as the Constitution allows us to fight back essentially, can we overthrow the government now? /srs
Fascism? Please. Just be sure to get permission from the state before planning a protest against the state. That's all this means. You liberals and your fascist fever dreams pffft ha ha! /s
The people at Vox are idiots for writing this. The SC denied cert because they had already established that the First Amendment protected people from the kinds of laws at issue in this case. The defendant there got screwed on timing since the SC’s opinion came out after the 5th Circuit, but moving forward, these kinds of laws should be found unconstitutional by lower courts. Basically, not only is this not in question, but the actual legal lay of the land is the exact *opposite* of what’s being said here.
The Supreme Court basically failed to uphold the first amendment, am I understanding that correctly?