Last Wednesday, we shared some observations about protestors gathering at the homes of Supreme Court Justices after the leak of a purported preliminary ruling throwing out Roe v. Wade.
Last weekend, the host of FOX News Sunday Night in America, Trey Gowdy, pointedly identified these targeted protests as more than illegal. He argued they strike at the foundation of our nation and its liberties.
In an era where liberty and license are too easily confused—and where that confusion is often deliberately stoked by those who seek to grow their power from it to the detriment of the nation—one word seems expendable.
But Gowdy maintains that that single word is essential to our existence.
America has a rich history when it comes to protests. You can argue that our nation was formed as a protest. And the First Amendment certainly contemplated people would want to express their beliefs and assemble and petition the government. But there’s a very important word in the First Amendment that doesn’t get a lot of attention: the word “peaceably.”
—as in the right of the people “peaceably” to assemble.
You may recall Chris Cuomo once asked, “show me where it says protestors are supposed to be police and peaceful.” Okay, Chris, it’s right there in the First Amendment, the same amendment which allows you and others to make a living on television. It requires peace, and if you’re not peaceful it’s a crime.
You are welcome to protest and you don’t have to be polite or fair or even accurate but you do have to be peaceful.
Our next guest, Esther Salas, is a federal judge who was also the very proud parent of an outstanding young man. A little less than two years ago, they were at home enjoying each other as loving families do; the doorbell rang and her son Daniel bounded up the stairs to answer it. It was not a neighbor. It was not a deliveryman. It was a disgruntled lawyer armed with a gun and her home address and he shot her only son to death and seriously injured her husband.
This judge and her family were targeted because she was a judge. Becoming a federal judge is the pinnacle of a legal career. But it provides no insulation to the pain of losing a child to an act of violence.
And now there are people showing up at the homes of Supreme Court Justices. And to what end? For what purpose?
How does showing up at someone’s home advance your argument?
How is it persuasive to intimidate family members and neighbors? Do you really think you will change minds or change the way that judges look at cases and issues, by posing a threat?
It’s against the law to show up at a judge’s house trying to intimidate or influence a decision. You are welcome to disagree with judges. You can take issues with their rulings, if you think a judge is wrong, you can appeal, you can defeat that judge at the ballot box or through impeachment. But you are not welcome to show up at a judge’s house to intimidate or influence that judge.
And to that end, why are the home addresses of federal judges publicly available in the first place, especially as threats and security incidents against judges are on the rise?
Something is going on in this country and it is not good. Heckling people at restaurants, accosting them as they leave a rally or a political event, storming the Capitol, trespassing on other people’s property—to what end?
Your protest doesn’t have to be fair or accurate, although it would be much more persuasive if it was. Your protest doesn’t have to be polite although it’s ironic you are using bad behavior to complain about somebody else’s perceived bad behavior. But protests so have to be peaceful. And when they’re not, you give license on both sides of the ideological spectrum to do the same.
Protesters should be peaceful and law-abiding. Whether it is in pursuit of criminal justice reform, the counting of the electoral college, or decisions about what rights lie in the penumbra of other rights.
The law is about the only thing holding this country together right now. You are free to disagree with the law, argue against it, seek to change it.
You are not free to disregard it, because when you disregard the law, even in your pursuit of some perceived higher ideal, you weaken the law. And once it’s weakened, it is weakened forever. And you’re most assuredly not welcome to show up at a judge’s house to complain about a decision, no matter how strongly you feel.