“(e) Definitions.—As used in this section:
(1) Facility.—
The term “facility” includes a hospital, clinic, physician’s office, or other facility that provides reproductive health services, and includes the building or structure in which the facility is located. (2) Interfere with.— The term “interfere with” means to restrict a person’s freedom of movement.
(3) Intimidate.—
The term “intimidate” means to place a person in reasonable apprehension of bodily harm to him- or herself or to another.
(4) Physical obstruction.—
The term “physical obstruction” means rendering impassable ingress to or egress from a facility that provides reproductive health services or to or from a place of religious worship, or rendering passage to or from such a facility or place of religious worship unreasonably difficult or hazardous.”
There you have it folks. ‘Nothing to see here’.
Even the place of worship is on the chopping block.
You sleep with dogs you get fleas.
The Left in this country doesn’t give a hoot about your Rights, Peace and Happiness.
We had more respect from the Mob when gangsters ran around.
You’re there only to work and support the monkey on your back.
No matter how hard you fight for your place in this union they always come with a new way to call you racist, bigot and unworthy of ANY respect.
You think Nazies were bad???
Nazies lasted a decade. When will you see the end of THESE Nazies.
We had a wave of them in the 60s then the 90s and on…
Is there EVER an end to it? Only when you finaly give up.
You are correct leftists are interested in leftist libism…these people could care less about your right to worship, to live in peace, to drive what you want….
Who terrorized Jewish students on college campuses for more than a year? Lib democrats…
Who destroyed Tesla dealerships and people private automobiles just because they didn’t like DOGE? Lib democrats!
Who chose violence in Minneapolis assaulting ICE and the Border Patrol? Lib Dems!
Those people are the greatest threat to the freedom we enjoy in this country….if they don’t like your position on climate change or men in women’s sports, if after they worked so hard to orchestrate the Biden administration’s invasion of America by illegals they certainly aren’t going to just sit by and let the orange man remove all those people. Lefties will go out of their way to create chaos, make your life just as difficult and unpleasant as needed if you dare to stand in their way.
Absolutely no one has said this. First of all, the discussion is as to Don Lemon and the other journalist. They are 100% protected by the First Amendment and did not step out of their role as journalist covering an newsworthy event.
As to the others, there are clearly state law charges that can be brought and maybe the federal civil rights case. That is a very novel interpretation of 42 USC 241, which says
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
Sec 242 provides
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States . . .
Section 242 only applies to state actors. Section 241 can apply to private individuals.
HOwever, in Screws v. United States, the Supreme Court held that a conviction under a related statute, 18 U.S.C. §242, required proof of the defendant’s specific intent to deprive the victim of a constitutional right. In United States v. Guest, the Supreme Court read this same requirement into §241, the conspiracy statute. That means that the primary intent of the incursion was to prevent the parishioners from freely exercising religious worship. I think that that is a stretch because the application of this section has been limited to
rights which Congress could secure against the
interference of private individuals and did not protect rights! which
the Constitution “merely guarantees from abridgement by the
States”’
Sure. That’s not a face act violation or KKK act violation. That’s a misdemeanor.
(Specifically the journalist)
This church, like Walmart, is a private property. However it has hours where it is open to public. They of course reserve the right to kick anyone out they want. Since it is private property.
No one has said otherwise. You keep misreading or not comprehending what is being said.
