Supreme Court Bans Protests On Its Grounds
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has come up with a new regulation banning demonstrations on its grounds, two days after a broader anti-demonstration law was declared unconstitutional.
The regulation bans activities on the court's grounds or building such as picketing, speech-making, marching, vigils or religious services "that involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which is reasonably likely to draw a crowd or onlookers."
John Whitehead, the president of the Rutherford Institute...called the new regulation "repugnant" to the Constitution...Whitehead said there are solutions short of what the court came up with Thursday, such as creating a "free speech zone" on the plaza..."Doing away with all of it – I don't understand what they're doing," he said.
A spokeswoman for the Supreme Court declined comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
re: 'doing away with all of it - don't understand what they're doing'
"What they're doing"? - that's easy. Answer: Doing away with all of it. This was clearly demonstrated three months ago when incoming CIA chief Brennan swore in on an original 1787 draft Constitution without the Bill of Rights:
Brennan Takes CIA Oath On Pre-Legal 1787 Constitution Without Bill Of Rights; Teddy Roosevelt Symbolism 3-9-13 "Keeping everything in context...[it]...seems to be a very intentional setting aside of a true recognition of the rule of law in the USA..."
Bill of Rights summarized: 1. Freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition [see post]
Three months ago the message, aside from the draft constitution, was no 'Bill of Rights', and so now here it is, SCOTUS says they are exempt from #1
Bill of Rights, Constitution? Not in the totalitarian antichrist global government foretold in the Bible. This is how it is coming about. Believing is seeing. Rev. 18:4
***
Compare: SCOTUS Rules 'Police State' Has More Right To Your DNA Than You Do - 6/3/13
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has come up with a new regulation banning demonstrations on its grounds, two days after a broader anti-demonstration law was declared unconstitutional.
The regulation bans activities on the court's grounds or building such as picketing, speech-making, marching, vigils or religious services "that involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which is reasonably likely to draw a crowd or onlookers."
John Whitehead, the president of the Rutherford Institute...called the new regulation "repugnant" to the Constitution...Whitehead said there are solutions short of what the court came up with Thursday, such as creating a "free speech zone" on the plaza..."Doing away with all of it – I don't understand what they're doing," he said.
A spokeswoman for the Supreme Court declined comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
re: 'doing away with all of it - don't understand what they're doing'
"What they're doing"? - that's easy. Answer: Doing away with all of it. This was clearly demonstrated three months ago when incoming CIA chief Brennan swore in on an original 1787 draft Constitution without the Bill of Rights:
Brennan Takes CIA Oath On Pre-Legal 1787 Constitution Without Bill Of Rights; Teddy Roosevelt Symbolism 3-9-13 "Keeping everything in context...[it]...seems to be a very intentional setting aside of a true recognition of the rule of law in the USA..."
Bill of Rights summarized: 1. Freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition [see post]
Three months ago the message, aside from the draft constitution, was no 'Bill of Rights', and so now here it is, SCOTUS says they are exempt from #1
Bill of Rights, Constitution? Not in the totalitarian antichrist global government foretold in the Bible. This is how it is coming about. Believing is seeing. Rev. 18:4
***
Compare: SCOTUS Rules 'Police State' Has More Right To Your DNA Than You Do - 6/3/13
No comments :
Post a Comment
Unfortunately verification hassle has been made necessary due to infestation of spam-bots - AVRev. 18:4