Skip to comments.Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal
Posted on 02/29/2012 9:12:11 PM PST by combat_boots
Just when you thought the government couldnt ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.
The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isnt already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.
Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at rt.com ...
I think this is a duplicate to whenifhow’s thread.
The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347... the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn't already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.
And the sponsors of this Bill are...?
IIRC I read that it passed with well over 300 votes in the House (and I believe SINGLE digit “nays” in the House, and passed unanimously in the Senate, but no record of who voted was kept). Make no mistake. NDAA was mere the first in a “long train of abuses.” We quit having representation when they froze our Representatives at a ridiculously tiny number, to consolidate power.
Tyhe United States Constitution???
That old thing!
Ask any Democrat, and you’ll learn - and correctly - that the musty, old museum-piece document hasn’t meant anything in years...
Latest Title: Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011
Sponsor: Rep Rooney, Thomas J. [FL-16] (introduced 1/19/2011) Cosponsors (1)
Latest Major Action: 2/27/2012 Resolving differences — House actions. Status: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 388 - 3 (Roll no. 73).
Latest Action: 2/27/2012 Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
House Reports: 112-9
"Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country."(Don't get me wrong, I think this admin is EVIL, but I want to be sure what we are standing against...)
Any other news sources pick this story up to confirm?
Why do I envision the Union squatters ensconced in the Wisconsin Capitol for days, and feel some satisfaction that their butts will be guaranteed delivered elsewhere expeditiously, if they ever try such a thing anywhere again?
I too would like to see an established source or two on this revelation. Too pooped to google up.
I checked out his website. It sounds like he’s a staunch conservative, but no party affiliation was conspicuous.
You do realize that this is aimed squarely at Conservatives and the TEA Party. LIBs and OWS have nothing to worry about.
Is there nobody to challenge a blatantly unconstitutional bill such as this? I would think that even the ACLU would be up in arms over this. Their silence only proves that LIBs have nothing to worry about.
Meanwhile, our rulers continue to remove themselves from we, the people. Civil disobedience time? CW2 time?
I am not going to be surprised to learn that every Republican voter, Tea Party activist and conservative writer or blogger is and will be audited every year. Those 10,000 IRS agents have their orders.
Meanwhile, the cronies, crooks and ‘friends’ skate on their taxes.
“Any other news sources pick this story up to confirm?”
Dunno. Maybe the inferences are out there a bit far. Yet. The lies and twists of the ‘Administration’ does not make anything impossible or apparent. You’d expect Linda Blair head spinning by now, you know? At least split tongues and visible disease. They can’t all be Dorian Gray.
When was the LAST time 0bama held an official press conference? Met with the Cabinet?
H.R.347 — Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011 (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate] - ENR)
One Hundred Twelfth Congress
United States of America
AT THE SECOND SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and twelve
To correct and simplify the drafting of section 1752 (relating to restricted buildings or grounds) of title 18, United States Code.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011’.
SEC. 2. RESTRICTED BUILDING OR GROUNDS.
Section 1752 of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
-`Sec. 1752. Restricted building or grounds
`(1) knowingly enters or remains in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so;
`(2) knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engages in disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to, any restricted building or grounds when, or so that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions;
`(3) knowingly, and with the intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, obstructs or impedes ingress or egress to or from any restricted building or grounds; or
`(4) knowingly engages in any act of physical violence against any person or property in any restricted building or grounds;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
`(b) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) is—
`(1) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if—
`(A) the person, during and in relation to the offense, uses or carries a deadly or dangerous weapon or firearm; or
`(B) the offense results in significant bodily injury as defined by section 2118(e)(3); and
`(2) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in any other case.
`(c) In this section—
`(1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds’ means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area—
`(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;
`(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or
`(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and
`(2) the term `other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.’.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
re “to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country”
CB: are you referring to
“or within such proximity to”
in that text?
Oh, hi there.
That’s the text of the bill I looked up. Sorry. I should have italicized it or something.
I got it from thomas.loc.gov
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.