Legal experts say Capitol mob’s actions fit the definition of sedition
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
The part in bold pretty much describes what took place yesterday. No it was not just a protest that got out of control. It pretty much aimed to shut down the constitutional processes of the United States, and in the process attempted by force to size, take and possess the Capital building,
It does not matter how just or unjust where their concerns, or whether they were exercising free speech.
I'm not a legal scholar, so maybe the question for us is where we draw the line when it comes to protests.
ReplyDeleteI remember Vietnam war protesters occupying the ROTC building at my university in 1970. They stayed there for five days demanding that military recruiters, that the university condemn Nixon's bombing of Laos and Cambodia, and that all students occupying the building receive amnesty for the protest.
There was also the famous sit-down strike and occupation of an auto plant at the Flint GM plant in the 1930s, stemming from the firing of employees for trying to organize a UAW local.
In both these instances, there was community outrage against the protesters. Many if not most community members believed that occupying a building was a bridge too far, that people were trespassing and prepared to fight back if the cops showed up.
I think it's helpful to think about what was different about protesters breaking into the Capitol building out of a deeply held conviction (however erroneous), and earlier protests that also offended offend community standards.
"...maybe the question for us is where we draw the line when it comes to protests." The same thought has occurred to me. Protests are considered under freedom of speech, or would it be more freedom of assembly? Anyway they've always seemed to me to be a very volatile way to make a point, all it takes is one hothead for things to go south in a big way. And yesterday it was WAY more than one hothead.
DeleteI am reading serious discussion of invoking the 25th amendment. Maybe that would be the cleanest quickest remedy. There are certainly grounds. Formerly I would have said with 13 days left, it isn't even worth it, just run the clock out. But as unhinged as Trump has shown himself to be, who knows what he will try in the remaining time left?
ReplyDeleteIt sounds as if Pence isn't on board with the 25th amendment, and he is the one who would have to start the ball rolling. Also I am reading that if Trump is impeached and convicted, he can never run for president again. That in itself makes it worth doing, if there is a chance the Senate would convict him.
DeleteI don't care how deeply their convictions were held - a mob that breaks into the Capitol of the nation - the seat of the government of the entire nation - is in a whole different category of illegality than is occupying an ROTC building or a manufacturing plant.
ReplyDeleteIt was an attack on our government - on our country - an attack intended to stop the certification of the election of the next president. It was doomed to fail, but it was intended as a seditious act, and it also resulted in deaths, damage to the Capitol, injuries to the police, etc.
Facebook post by Bishop Mariann Budde
ReplyDeleteHere in Washington we are still absorbing what happened on January 6. We find ourselves reaching out to those we love, no matter where they are, and receiving calls of concern from around the country. It’s an understandable response, given what’s happened.
Washington is no stranger to civic protest. Members of the congregations I serve are among the first to offer hospitality to protesters even with whom they disagree. We cherish the political freedom enshrined in our US Constitution guaranteeing the right to express dissenting opinions in the public square.
That is not what we witnessed this week. Rather we saw an attempted insurrection and desecration of the US Capitol and what it symbolizes, encouraged by the President himself. We also witnessed a notably different response on the part of law enforcement as compared to the way protesters last summer were treated. Had the majority of the insurrectionists been people of color, there would have been a bloodbath.
Among the most disturbing aspects of this travesty was the grievous misappropriation of the Christian faith. It must be said by all who claim to follow Jesus as Lord that there was nothing Christian about what happened at the US Capitol. Those who claim the mantle of Jesus for such deeds and the worldview that justified them do great damage not only to themselves, but the witness of the Christian faith.
As Christians we are called to live as Jesus lived, and to love as he loved, and, as he did, bear witness to the truth.
May God grant us all wisdom and courage for the living of this hour.
Prior to Jan. 6, I remember reading that the mayor of DC asked counter-protestors to the Trumpists to stay home, because she feared violent confrontations between the two groups. It appears that for the most part they did stay away. I suppose that is one saving grace, that the injuries and deaths could have been much worse if violence had broken out between the two sides. The way it is now, there is no question that the Trumpists own what happened.
ReplyDeleteThough there is a lot of deflection going on with them refusing to take any responsibility, blaming it on Trump supporters having their feelings hurt and being disrespected. Besides, Maxine Waters said something mean in 2018.
In 2021 America, this conflict may be won by the side that whines best.
Delete