[CFW]

A good article here at The Federalist on the SCOTUS oral arguments yesterday on Fischer.

[Sacajaweau]

It was not their intention. It was a protest....no more. And a few became very rowdy...The problem is...you were stuck in a crowd and there was not going against the crowd.

Insurrection...absurd...

[bray]

Sounds like they don’t like the Biden definition of free speech.

[Fido969]

Good.

[IYAS9YAS]

I always found it interesting that the single largest armed populace in the world came to perform an insurrection without said arms.

[FlingWingFlyer]

The whole world is laughing at this “country’s justice system”. The biggest clown show on the planet. The Trump and JaySix fiascos are found to be hilarious by most foreigners. In fact, millions of foreigners are risking their lives wading in the Rio Grande to watch the American clown show. Water Buffalo Law and Banana Boat Carmen Miranda Hat “Judges” really cracks them up.

[nopardons]

BTTT

[EliRoom8]

Here's the take-away for me:

Only one justice — Justice Elena Kagan — seemed from her questions at least to be comfortable with the DOJ’s interpretation . . .

[Labyrinthos]

Equally interesting is the SCOTUS’ April 15th opinion denying cert in a case involving a lawsuit against the leader of a BLM riot in Louisiana that resulted in a serious injury to a police officer: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-373_8njq.pdf.

Sotomayor, writing for the Court, sent a message to the the courts below that based upon Counterman v. Colorado, 600
U. S. 66 (2023), “the First Amendment precludes punishment [for incitement], whether civil or criminal, unless the
speaker’s words were ‘intended’ (not just likely) to produce
imminent disorder.”

I also read this as a warning to the DOJ and the judge assigned to the Trump J6 trial, that the DOJ must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump actually intended to incite protesters to enter the Capital for the purpose of disrupting official proceedings concerning the 2020 election.

Thus, even if the SCOTUS agrees with the DOJ’s reading of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2), the charges may not survive a 1st Amendment Challenge.

[j.havenfarm]

I have always hated the end of June roll out of big cases. It’s so anti small “r” Republican that we wait for the pronouncements on high from our philosopher kings. In this case, every day that political prisoners continue to suffer under the bogus interpretation of the statute is an affront to justice. That SCOTUS would wait another 60-70 to rectify it would be an obscenity

[spacejunkie2001]

sorry I didn’t read through the article but do you know when SCOTUS will rule on this?

[Liberty Valance]

[sauropod]

.

[Gay State Conservative]

When Bowmann gets 20 years then maybe the J6 trespassers should.Not before.