Patriot Picket Civil Rights Suit FILED!

Occam · Jan 24, 2022

aray said:
Maryland clearly has not yet thrown off The Crown.

Well, that's because it fits so well. Comfortable, even! Keeps the rain and the rural constituents from wrecking the legislative dry cleaning.

View attachment 332702

nedsurf · Jan 24, 2022

aray said:
From the brief on page 11: "Third, with respect to Kevin Hulbert’s claims, the right to record law enforcement officers is not a clearly established First Amendment right."

This thinking strikes at the very core of why Maryland is not, in fact, "The Free State". Are things permitted if they are not explicitly forbidden by the Constitution, or are they forbidden unless explicitly permitted by the Constitution? Freedom and Liberty demand the first interpretation; tyrants demand the second. Maryland clearly has not yet thrown off The Crown.

I'd get a good laugh if this becomes the vehicle that makes the 4th circuit consider filming public officials a 1A right. IIRC 6 other circuits ruled that it was part of 1A rights and only the 8th circuit denied that one has the right to film public officials in public doing their job.

welder516 · Jan 24, 2022

In Jeff's memory i hope this goes in a way where some things can be exposed. I pray the legal can is not kicked down the road for multiple years because the state works with our tax money and have an unlimited resource.

Kharn · Jan 24, 2022

From the state's brief:
"Groups can obtain a permit for
demonstrations in Lawyers’ Mall; a permit is optional and not required, but
possession of a permit will give priority to the permitted group if another, nonpermitted
group shows up at the same time."

How many people from disfavored organizations have been ticketed for being in Lawyers Mask without a permit over the years?

aray · Jan 24, 2022

welder516 said:
In Jeff's memory i hope this goes in a way where some things can be exposed. I pray the legal can is not kicked down the road for multiple years because the state works with our tax money and have an unlimited resource.

I agree; sadly this is a too-often abused tool by governments: bleed the plaintiffs dry of money and of time by delaying things as long as possible, all from the bottomless pit of taxpayer dollars.

It was wise of Jeff and Kevin to allow MSI to come onboard as co-plaintiffs in the case, thus ensuring that the case survives both Jeff and Kevin. (And hopefully Kevin will be with us for a long, long time into the future.)

Bob A · Jan 24, 2022

aray said:
From the brief on page 11: "Third, with respect to Kevin Hulbert’s claims, the right to record law enforcement officers is not a clearly established First Amendment right."

This thinking strikes at the very core of why Maryland is not, in fact, "The Free State". Are things permitted if they are not explicitly forbidden by the Constitution, or are they forbidden unless explicitly permitted by the Constitution? Freedom and Liberty demand the first interpretation; tyrants demand the second. Maryland clearly has not yet thrown off The Crown.

10th Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

dblas · Jan 24, 2022

aray said:
From the brief on page 11: "Third, with respect to Kevin Hulbert’s claims, the right to record law enforcement officers is not a clearly established First Amendment right."

This thinking strikes at the very core of why Maryland is not, in fact, "The Free State". Are things permitted if they are not explicitly forbidden by the Constitution, or are they forbidden unless explicitly permitted by the Constitution? Freedom and Liberty demand the first interpretation; tyrants demand the second. Maryland clearly has not yet thrown off The Crown.

Apparently the AG has forgotten the outcome of Maryland v Graber(2010) about public video recording of LE.

Or an opinion, by then AG Dougie Gansler, advising a state legislator that, contrary to the claims of Harford County State's Attorney Joseph Cassilly, a traffic stop is not an instance where a police officer can claim a reasonable expectation of privacy. (Rosenberg was the legislator asking for clarification).

DC-W · Jan 24, 2022

Graber was in state court, so no precedential holdings affecting the federal questions at issue here, but it is to abandon what they’d probably defend for other plaintiffs because guns bad.

DC-W · Jan 24, 2022

Also, here’s a 2012 Dept of Justice, Civil Rights Division letter on recording police: https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/..._states_letter_re_photography_5_14_2012_0.pdf

rbird7282 · Jan 24, 2022

Kharn said:
From the state's brief:
"Groups can obtain a permit for
demonstrations in Lawyers’ Mall; a permit is optional and not required, but
possession of a permit will give priority to the permitted group if another, nonpermitted
group shows up at the same time."

How many people from disfavored organizations have been ticketed for being in Lawyers Mask without a permit over the years?

So the state admits right there that a permit is not required and yet they arrested Jeff and claimed he needed a permit.
I hope the state gets kicked square in the nut sack and that Jeff is smiling from above.

Stoveman · Jan 24, 2022

DC-W said:
Here's the call, btw: https://apps.oag.state.md.us/Recorded_05-Feb-2018.mp3

Has anyone actually listened to this?

"....the Lieutenant Governor is at the Miller Senate office building and is going to walk back to the State House at some point. Don't want them to give him a bunch of stuff for whatever reason."

I'm not sure which I am more shocked by, the fact that someone thought that the PP would harass Boyd Rutherford or the cavalier way that the Capitol Police dispatch knew exactly what this guy meant for them to do when he made the call.

So who made the call? Someone in the Mansion who handles these types of things? Someone on Rutherford's security detail?

Kharn · Jan 24, 2022

dblas said:
Apparently the AG has forgotten the outcome of Maryland v Graber(2010) about public video recording of LE.

Or an opinion, by then AG Dougie Gansler, advising a state legislator that, contrary to the claims of Harford County State's Attorney Joseph Cassilly, a traffic stop is not an instance where a police officer can claim a reasonable expectation of privacy. (Rosenberg was the legislator asking for clarification).

Wasn't that the case about the motorcyclist and the plain clothes/ unmarked car state trooper who didn't identify himself despite having his gun out when he grabbed the bike's bars? Then more Troopers swatted the motorcyclist when he posted the video on YouTube?

Nickberg500 · Jan 24, 2022

Stoveman said:
Has anyone actually listened to this?

"....the Lieutenant Governor is at the Miller Senate office building and is going to walk back to the State House at some point. Don't want them to give him a bunch of stuff for whatever reason."

I'm not sure which I am more shocked by, the fact that someone thought that the PP would harass Boyd Rutherford or the cavalier way that the Capitol Police dispatch knew exactly what this guy meant for them to do when he made the call.

So who made the call? Someone in the Mansion who handles these types of things? Someone on Rutherford's security detail?

I'm dying to know who made that call as well.

KingClown · Jan 25, 2022

Nickberg500 said:
I'm dying to know who made that call as well.

Ill give you 3 big fat rino commie guesses.

DC-W · Jan 25, 2022

The answers for which y’all seek are on the case page

From the District Court’s opinion:
https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=249&catid=4&m=0

teratos · Jan 25, 2022

DC-W said:
The answers for which y’all seek are on the case page

From the District Court’s opinion:
https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=249&catid=4&m=0

The Lt. Governor signed up to "get stuff" while in public. No respect for Boyd Rutherford on my end. Another petty tyrant.

dblas · Jan 25, 2022

Kharn said:
Wasn't that the case about the motorcyclist and the plain clothes/ unmarked car state trooper who didn't identify himself despite having his gun out when he grabbed the bike's bars? Then more Troopers swatted the motorcyclist when he posted the video on YouTube?

Yep, that's the one.

Kharn · Jan 25, 2022

dblas said:
Yep, that's the one.

The ACLU was all over that case, I wonder why they're not throwing weight around here...

DC-W · Jan 27, 2022

Frosh’s anti-1st Amendment and pro-Qualified Immunity arguments in this case caught coverage by the Maryland Daily Record:

https://thedailyrecord.com/2022/01/...-allowing-protester-to-sue-arresting-officer/

DC-W · Feb 3, 2022

Not that this is persuasive or binding in any way, but my eyes caught the plan adopted by the Baltimore City Police Department in regards to how officers respond to protests, demonstrations, and other First Amendment-protected activities. Interestingly, they observe the existence of a 1A right to record the police.

https://www.baltimorepolice.org/tra...lic-order-forces-standard-operating-procedure

I've been following US v. BPD, the consent decree case, and happened to catch this.

Patriot Picket Civil Rights Suit FILED!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Not Even ONE Indictment

Attachments

Ultimate Member

Deplorable Welder

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

όυ φροντισ

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

TV Personality

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

SOmething Witty

Ultimate Member

My hair is amazing

Past President, MSI

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Attachments

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics