Bill Maher Nails This Point When Discussing Free Speech and 'Team Hamas' Antics...
After Her Horrifying Response on Antisemitism, Liz Magill's Presidency at UPenn Is Over
Something Is Absent From UPenn President's Disastrous 'Kill All the Jews' Explainer Video
Democrats Have A Golden Opportunity To Destroy The Right
What the Democratic Party Has Become
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 195: Hebrew Bible Christmas Prophecies
American Legion Signals Compromise In Battle Over Veteran Disability Benefits
Harvard 2024
It Is Downright Scandalous to Accuse Israel of Genocide
Biden WH Refuses to Take Responsibility for Inflation, Says Companies Need to Lower...
NYC Trying to Register Illegal Immigrants to Vote, Republican Rep Says
Will Joe Biden Pardon His Corrupt Son In Light Of New Charges?
Americans Would Lose More 2A Rights Under Newly Proposed Democrat-Backed Bill
Biden Promises to Spend 'Billion 300 Million Trillion 300 Million Dollars' On Infrastructu...
Wisconsin Democrat Vetoes Bill That Would Protect Children From Leftist Transgender Agenda

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.


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.'"


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


Trending on Townhall Videos