Skip to comments.Judge to Trump: No protection for speech inciting violence
Posted on 04/02/2017 4:46:21 AM PDT by Olog-hai
A federal judge has rejected President Donald Trumps free speech defense against a lawsuit accusing him of inciting violence against protesters at a campaign rally.
Trumps lawyers sought to dismiss the lawsuit by three protesters who say they were roughed up by his supporters at a March 1, 2016 rally in Louisville, Kentucky. They argued that Trump didnt intend for his supporters to use force. Two women and a man say they were shoved and punched by audience members at Trumps command. Much of it was captured on video and widely broadcast during the campaign, showing Trump pointing at the protesters and repeating get them out.
Judge David J. Hale in Louisville ruled Friday that the suit against Trump, his campaign and three of his supporters can proceed. Hale found ample facts supporting allegations that the protesters injuries were a direct and proximate result of Trumps actions, and noted that the Supreme Court has ruled out constitutional protections for speech that incites violence. It is plausible that Trumps direction to get em out of here advocated the use of force, the judge wrote. It was an order, an instruction, a command.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
The House and Senate need to start impeaching the black-robed, lawless brigands.
Odungo appointment in 2014
Congress could put these judges out of work by legislation.
You mean Congress doing it’s actual job?
Yup, imagine that.
They sure wanted Hillary in there so they could continue to play the Supreme Soviet to the executive’s Politburo. Both “parties”.
Plausibility is not proof.
This judge should be impeached for inability to think rationally. (a bit of sarcasm but you get the point)
The Judge is not supposed to rule rationally. He was appointed to make progressive judgements and law
Extermination is the way
Yet the rats and thier criminal anarchists can do and say what they please
How is this a federal issue?
“No protection for speech inciting violence”
That’s a Pandora’s box given all the things the left have said about Trump.
Trump can use this to nail Soros ass to the wall.
and what of Robert Creamer?
front row seat for Obama’s farewell speech in Chicago, still the big dem operative he always was.
continues to write regularly for Huffington Post, inciting people to permanently protest the Trump presidency, in pieces such as “Why The Anti-Trump Progressive Mobilization Could Mark A Major Inflection Point In American Political History”.
no fall-out whatsoever from the Project Veritas expose of dems organising disruption or Chicago shut-down of Trump rallies!
Aren’t campaign rallies private events? The venue is paid for by the campaign. (Remember:”I paid for this microphone.”?)
Were Secret Service present? Didn’t zer0 issue some rule that any attempt at disrupting any event with SS in attendance was a felony?
While injuries may have been sustained, likely they came from resisting ejection.
If this were to be upheld, anyone could shut down any event they liked under Free Speech while denying free speech.
I don’t see how this survives higher court review.
If anybody’s speech incited violence, it was the protestors. They need to be charged and sued.
Maybe they’ll flip as witnesses against sugar-daddy Soros.
So, this means Lynch, Sharpton, Jackson, and a whole bunch of blacks are on their way to prison. Right?
If I remember correctly this appointment was long after Homobama started calling for guns to be brought to knife fight.
No silly. Obviously you need a refresher in liblogic 101. It’s as simple as this. Donald J Trump, by his mere presence, is enough to cause people(normally peaceful tolerant libs) to be incited and rebel. Solution. If Donald J Trump would simply hand the reins to hildabeast(who actually had a gazillion more votes), all would be well and no more violence would ensue. Uh, not gonna happen. Will the congress critters do the right thing? Probably not. ;-)
You are correct...
So if the courtroom is disrupted during the trial... what will the judge tell the bailiff or court security? ‘Let them stay?’
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.