Depending on whom you talk to, Ohio HB is either an anti-rioting bill (GOP/sponsors) or an anti-First Amendment bill. @Sam_Lawrence14 falls in the latter group—and he is right. Here’s why (Thread):
First, this isn’t about being for or against The Police writ large, or even against just Sting; I’m not. I also can’t opine on the motivation of the GOP sponsors or the groups funding similar legislative efforts across the country. But this bill as written won’t do what they say.
The bill adds criminal offenses to conduct that is already illegal, supersizing penalties when the conduct occurs during a “riot.” It leaves it to police to determine whether the protest constitutes a “riot.”
The problem? Violence occurs at protests when there is lack of trust or respect between protestors and police. And in a protest, it positions the police force as more antagonistic toward the protestors—before it even gets to that point.
So if a protest occurs, laws like this push tension higher. Think of it as adding additional gunpowder into a powder keg. The result isn’t a safer protest, but a more dangerous one.
Do the increased penalties make people think twice? Maybe sometimes, but violence in a protest comes, again, from engagement and mistrust. The behavior is already illegal; a higher penalty will barely move the needle here.
The closest thing this does to preventing violence is preventing protest. This kind of legislation isn’t designed to stop riots; it’s designed to keep people from coming together to protest in the first place.
The solution isn’t a more imposing penalty, any more than it’s a more imposing or militarized police force. Rather, it’s creating safer spaces for the protests to occur. Reform the process and procedures police forces in some of these locations use.
And, if you really want preventative measures, work to improve community relations with the police. If there are racist officers, get them out. If the police fail or err, own it and work to improve. Show contrition and responsibility.
Ratcheting up state punishment for protests is not the answer. We need a responsible police force, one citizens have reason to respect. Work to prevent and punish crime, but work to create goodwill too. That is where we can reduce violence, where we can make our cities safer.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We have midterm elections coming up this year. Many people vote for Republicans because your parents do/did, or because you always have. But before you do, please consider this guide to whether their “ideas” may hurt you if implemented. (Thread) #ResistanceUnited #LiveBlue2022
Are you or someone you love part of the LGBTQ+ community? The GOP has a plan for you: cut your rights and erase your existence.
Are you or someone you love non-white? The GOP does not think highly of you, and is in fact using racist dog whistles and foghorns to motivate voters who hate you.
The opinion being reported, stating that Trump and John Eastman “more likely than not… conspired to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress” is fascinating. That is not a holding or finding of guilt, so this opinion doesn’t have a straight line to arrest.
Still, I encourage everyone to read Carter’s opinion for the revealing, with documentation cited, of a powerful factual outline. For those screaming for Garland to “do something,” I believe he is building the case. Meanwhile, an outline of the opinion (citations to page numbers):
The opinion begins with a discussion of Trump’s election fraud claims. Of particular note: a January 2, 2021 briefing “urging several hundred state legislators from states won by President Biden to ‘decertify’ electors,” and a breakdown of his efforts to pressure Georgia. (3-4)
Why should judges have empathy? Because when a case comes before a court, it doesn’t come as a data point or a political opportunity. As GOP senators sprint to the spotlight, it’s worth remembering that our laws apply to humans.
This doesn’t mean favoring criminal defendants, and there is nothing in this case’s history to suggest Judge Brown Jackson did so. It does mean that considering the humanity of both the defendant and his or her victims matters.
This is true whether you are writing laws or serving on the bench. When some sick opportunist like the ever-pathetic @HawleyMO uses lies and human suffering to imply in front of Judge Brown Jackson’s daughter that she is on the side of child pornographers? That’s non-empathy.
The only policy position the GOP has taken consistently is that taxes are bad. It turns out that this, too, is only about protecting their donors. @SenRickScott cares about money—but not yours.
All the culture war insanity is about dividing people: white people against black and brown people, men against women, cis-het people against LGBTQ+ people. Because their whole goal is to protect the power of a few against the mass of American humanity.
It’s not that they hate you, exactly; it’s that your economic and health and emotional needs are mere nuisances, rather than something about which they want to be bothered with pretending to care. So they distract with hatred while they go about undermining democracy itself.
@MarshaBlackburn may have no redeeming qualities, but at least she gets #FridayLimericks. #LimerickRhyme
Constitutional scholar she’s not,
But she’ll strike while the iron is hot.
If you want to talk facts
Past your asinine acts,
Then Ms. Marsha, let’s see what you’ve got.
Marsha’s history’s fully replete
With stupidity less than discreet.
She is dumb, but she’s proud,
And will shout it out loud:
Who needs brains? It’s so easy to cheat.
Tennessee and DC aren’t enough
When the senator wants to see stuff.
Glad to dine and to fly
When the campaign will buy—
Feels no guilt with no morals to slough. murfreesborovoice.com/article/4549/m…
So while @LeaderMcConnell pretends not to have made up his mind about Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, he is trying out a few talking points for what will be his inevitable opposition. (Thread) #LiveBlue2022 #ResistanceUnited
1. How dare democrats nominate someone who may have empathy for criminal defendants? This is disturbing for two reasons. First, in a system that presumes innocence, why should a judge not come in with empathy for a criminal defendant?
Empathy doesn’t mean favoring that side. It means understanding emotions and viewpoints on a human level. The kind of thing you would hope a judge considering intent elements of a crime would be able to do.