Judge to President Trump: No protection for speech inciting violence

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: AP

A federal judge has rejected President Donald Trump's free speech defense against a lawsuit accusing him of inciting violence against protesters at a campaign rally.

Trump's lawyers sought to dismiss the lawsuit by three protesters who say they were roughed up by his supporters at a March 1, 2016 rally in Louisville, Kentucky. They argued that Trump didn't intend for his supporters to use force.

Two women and a man say they were shoved and punched by audience members at Trump's command. Much of it was captured on video and widely broadcast during the campaign, showing Trump pointing at the protesters and repeating "get them out."

Judge David J. Hale in Louisville ruled Friday that the suit against Trump, his campaign and three of his supporters can proceed. Hale found ample facts supporting allegations that the protesters' injuries were a "direct and proximate result" of Trump's actions, and noted that the Supreme Court has ruled out constitutional protections for speech that incites violence.



Read more: http://www.kiro7.com/news/local/judge-to-president-trump-no-protection-for-speech-inciting-violence/508219290

[Laffy Kat]

1. YAY.

[uppityperson]

2. K&R

[Cryptoad]

3. U can't hollar "Fire" in Theater!

[Kaleva]

13. The Supreme Court's Brandenburg v. Ohio decision in 1969 overturned that

"In 1969, the Supreme Court's decision in Brandenburg v. Ohio effectively overturned Schenck and any authority the case still carried. There, the Court held that inflammatory speech--and even speech advocating violence by members of the Ku Klux Klan--is protected under the First Amendment, unless the speech "is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action" (emphasis mine)."

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop-using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/

[cstanleytech]

17. I would say that Trump sounds guilty of inciting a lawless action.

[Kaleva]

28. That he can be nailed for.

The key is that it has to be inciting imminent lawless action.

[NYC Liberal]

22. Always surprises when liberals cite Schenck.

The "shouting fire in a crowded theater" argument was used to justify arresting and jailing anti-war protesters during WWI.

[IronLionZion]

4. Something needs to bring down teflon Don

He was explicitly inciting violence. There's plenty of evidence

Hoping that this works out for us in a good way instead of our country descending into brown shirts and pogroms.

[napi21]

5. Con man isn't used to losing. the Courts are teachig him a lesson. Wether he learns anything is

another story.

[tavernier]

32. I'm thinking he must be getting used to it soon

He's done nothing but lose since he was sworn in.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

33. He's probably tired of winning

So this is a welcome change.

[Hekate]

6. KnR

[brer cat]

7. K&R

[lambchopp59]

8. It's about time I heard a snippet of good news against the heartless regime

And their deplorable followers.

[Honeycombe8]

9. Good news! Something needs to be done to hold him accountable. nt

[Still In Wisconsin]

10. He must be really, really sick of winning by now!

Sooooo much winning.

[GWC58]

16. I asked my wife

if she was tired of all the winning we're having now. Her reply was "what?" "You know, all the winning Trump said we'd be sick of?" She then said "when he's out of office I'll count that as a win!" 👍😀

[Still In Wisconsin]

24. Perfectly said. n/t

[lordsummerisle]

11. k&r n/t

[jpak]

12. best news today

yup

[JudyM]

14. He will learn to be more subtle, but it's great that he got stung and the suit will proceed. Let

there be more broadly critical national dialogue on his divisiveness.

[Grammy23]

15. It's about time he was held accountable for his hateful talk.

He is on video repeatedly telling the audience to get 'em out of here. He also repeatedly said out loud what he'd "like" to do to protesters. "I'd like to punch him in the face." Another thing he often did was to point out the media people and talk about how awful they are and said they were dishonest, etc. it is a wonder there weren't full scale riots at his rallies.

[ProudLib72]

18. To me, this is the most important part of the article

Heimbach, for his part, sought to dismiss the lawsuit's discussion of his association with a white nationalist group and of statements he made about how Trump could advance the group's interests. The judge declined, saying such information could be important context when determining punitive damages.

Link Li'l Donnie to white supremacists.

[J_William_Ryan]

19. What Trump

and his supporters – and indeed most on the right – fail to understand or accept is that the United States is a Constitutional Republic whose citizens are subject solely to the rule of law – not men – as men are in capable of ruling justly; the Trump ‘administration’ is further proof of that.

[Dorn]

20. "It is plausible that Trump's direction to 'get 'em out of here' advocated the use of force,"

[Grassy Knoll]

21. Normal Americans Hate You, And An Eagle....

[tsuukiyomi]

29. Where,

pray tell, did you get that beautiful GIF, if I may ask?

[FakeNoose]

36. Love this!

[burrowowl]

23. YAY!

Go get them!

[KewlKat]

25. hope this judge can't lose his job

[HAB911]

26. lock him up!

[FakeNoose]

37. If they find for the victims, it doesn't mean Trump goes to jail

...He'll have to pay some kind of fine for the damages.

The important thing is to make sure he loses the lawsuit.

[dalton99a]

27. Great ruling.

[riversedge]

30. good to see.

[riversedge]

31. Interesting comment by a judge about Trumps comment.........

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/federal-judge-lawsuit-trump-rally-violence-article-1.3016562






Federal judge allows lawsuit against Donald Trump for violence at Kentucky rally


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/federal-judge-lawsuit-trump-rally-violence-article-1.3016562


BY Jason Silverstein
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Sunday, April 2, 2017, 11:46 AM


..... Trump’s lawyers fought for the case to be thrown out, arguing that Trump intended no violence and that his statements were only directed at security personnel.

But the judge didn’t buy that.

“Presumably, if he had intended for protesters to be escorted out by security personnel, Trump would have instructed the intervening audience members to stop what they were doing, rather than offering guidance on how to go about it,” Hale wrote in his decision.

Most Americans want independent probe into Trump-Russia ties

“(I)t is plausible that Trump’s direction to ‘get 'em out of here’ advocated the use of force...it was an order, an instruction, a command,” the judge added.........................

[red dog 1]

34. K&R...Thanks for posting

Kudos to Judge Hale
(Too bad Drumpf didn't nominate HIM for SCOTUS)

[NastyRiffraff]

35. Another win!!

Yay! He's winning so much he's getting tired of winning!