No, This Is Not the End of Tariffs
The US Men's Hockey Team Got a Call After Beating Canada Yesterday. You...
The Reactions to Team USA's Win Over Canada Were Amazing, But This One...
This Tweet From Kyle Rittenhouse About Trans Folk and ICE Will Surely Trigger...
JPMorgan Finally Admitted What It Did to Trump After 2020 Election
You'll Own Nothing: Latest Scottish Wealth Tax Plan Targets Property, Pensions and Jewelry
Check Out This Daily Mail Headline About Mexican Tourists Who Are Terrified of...
These Previous Remarks by Mexican President Sheinbaum Explain Why the Cartel Caused Chaos...
Your Kid Doesn’t Need Sushi. He Needs to Hear the Word ‘No.’
Leaked DNC Autopsy of 2024 Election Blames This for Kamala's Loss to President...
Tony Evers Just Guaranteed Wisconsin Energy Bills Will Skyrocket for the Next 20...
Mamdani Defends Shoveling ID Requirements As Few New Yorkers Sign Up to Dig...
Gavin Newsom Just Had a Joe Biden Moment
They Mean Retribution
Bessent Details Plan to Restore Tariffs While Clashing With CNN's Dana Bash Over...
Tipsheet

Even WaPo's Legal Experts Admit the Obvious About Protests At SCOTUS Justices' Homes

Even WaPo's Legal Experts Admit the Obvious About Protests At SCOTUS Justices' Homes
AP Photo/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades

Pro-abortion protests outside the homes of the conservative Supreme Court justices have increased in recent days after the court appears to be ready to overturn Roe v. Wade despite there being a federal law prohibiting protests outside the homes of judges.

Advertisement

Passed in 1950, 18 U.S. Code § 1507 states:

"Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

The Washington Post reached out to protest law experts who said the past and planned protests are in violation of the law:

"Tabatha Abu El-Haj, an expert on protest rights at Drexel University’s law school, said that the current protests at justices’ homes qualify under the statute and that the statute, if tested, would likely be found constitutional. "'The statute would seem to apply both because … they appear to be picketing and parading with the relevant intent and at the relevant locations,' Abu El-Haj said, 'but also because the statute has a catch-all ‘resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence.'" 

"Timothy Zick of the College of William & Mary agreed. 'The conduct appears to be within the statute’s prohibition,'" Zick said. 'Picketing includes activities such as demonstrating and protesting. The court has upheld properly tailored restrictions on pickets that target a particular home.'"

Advertisement

Related:

ROE V. WADE

The homes of Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Brett Kavanaugh, and Samuel Alito have been targeted in recent days with more protests at theirs and other conservative justices' homes planned.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement