Supreme Court Order List (11/02/20) (Per curiam in favor of Black Lives Matter)

The decision starts on the 9th page of the above pdf link.

(Note: Justice Barrett did not participate in any of the business on this order list)

The decision is an unsigned per curiam. We don’t know the identities of the participating Justices, at least 5, possibly 6 or 7. All we know is that Justice Barrett did not participate and Justice Thomas issued a summary dissent.

Petitioner DeRay McKeeson organized a Black Lives Matter protest in Baton Rouge after a police officer shot a black man. The protestors blocked a local highway, allegedly at McKeeson’s direction. While clearing the protestors from the highway, an unidentified individual threw a concrete object, striking and gravely injuring Respondent Officer John Doe, causing brain injury and loss of teeth.

Officer Doe sued McKeeson for damages, stating that his negligence in organizing the occupation of the street led to Doe’s injuries. The District Court dismissed on First Amendment grounds, but the Fifth Circuit revived the case. Today the Supreme Court vacated the Judgement of the Fifth Circuit and remanded for further consideration. But likely, the case will ultimately be dismissed as McKeeson is protected under the First Amendment from actions committed by third parties.

I believe the Supreme Court properly acted here. The First Amendment does place limitations on tort, otherwise it would be financially impossible for most people to organize a demonstration due to tort risk.

And now for a wee bit of snark.

Officers routinely hide behind qualified immunity.

McKeeson was shielded by the First Amendment.

While I feel bad for the specific officer, he is getting a taste of what it is like to be on the other side of a shield that protects from tort.

On one side, qualified immunity.

On the other side, the First Amendment.

Just some food for thought.

Supreme Court got it right.

1 Like

I agree they got it right.

No, have to say it’s a bad decision. She shouldn’t be liable if what she organized was a legal protest. If it was an illegal protest, without permit, she didn’t organize a protest, she organized a crime.

Yea, I might agree with this ^. I look forward to reading the opinion for the details.

At least the protest, was mostly peaceful.

It was a protest. If they gathered and blocked traffic, that does not make it an illegal protest. That makes it civil disobedience. Exactly what trump supporters did in jersey on Sunday. Now say a police officer was injured during the protest, should he have the right to sue the person or organization who originated the protest. Lol

No. In capital letters. Any Protest is protected by the first amendment.


Ahhhhhhhh…so when I asked you about your equal condemnation of blocking traffic, that I never heard until the Trump protest, this is your example? You are a one sided individual my friend.

so he got what he deserved then?

leftists are disgusting


Everyone chooses their form of protest.

I don’t condemn CD. That’s how you get things changed.

If people want to further their cause at the possible risk of being incarcerated.

Then have at it.

See for example the much revered Boston tea party.

Let’s see you condemn some of the founding fathers of this great nation.


Your one sided view has already been established. You should consider opening your other eye…and attempt to find balance in your views.

1 Like

I am balanced I do not condemn CD.


I thought blocking traffic made you a domestic terrorist.

Nah. Just a CD subject to arrest.


Same holds true for anyone that organizes an illegal protest in the name of Trump. Difference being whether what they organized was illegal, for instance, if they organized a drive for Trump, that’s legal, and then someone did something illegal, not the organizers fault. If the organizer can be shown to have organized the illegal act of shutting down the roadway, yes, they should be liable, just like any other criminal who conspired to commit any other crime would be.

3 posts were merged into an existing topic: General Off-Topic Slop from Various Threads +fd

Civil disobedience is illegal acts. Hence the “disobedience”. That post makes no sense.

I agree with the ruling because “unknown” threw the brick.

So, if we don’t know who killed the guard in a bank robbery the person who planned the robbery shouldn’t be civilly liable?

Not with murder.

See my edit, subject is civil liability.

Not for murder.

Did McKeeson plan throwing bricks at cops? Did he specifically invite the brick thrower? Did he tell him to do it? Did he suggest they bring bricks?

Let’s change the scenario a bit: you plan a protest for 2nd Amendment Rights. I show up armed. I decide to shoot a cop a little bit.

Should you be held civilly liable for my trigger pulling?