3 ms·
tl;dr: 1. "Kavanaugh was dining at a Morton's restaurant in Washington, D.C.". 2. "Protestors learned he was at the establishment." 3. "A group gathered outs
by 2143 4y ago
tl;dr:
1. "Kavanaugh was dining at a Morton's restaurant in Washington, D.C.".
2. "Protestors learned he was at the establishment."
3. "A group gathered outside the restaurant and told the manager to kick him out"
4. Morton issued a statement: "Politics, regardless of your side or views, should not trample the freedom at play of the right to congregate and eat dinner"
Now they get fake phone calls and fake reservations.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This seems like a real life straw-man attack. I don't see how this would bring anybody closer to solving the actual problem.
- jfengel 4y agoThere isn't any solution to the actual problem. The decision rests in the hands of this man and four others, who have absolute power to decide, and lifetime appointments to their jobs (none of whom are going to leave for at least a decade). The process has been followed: you have no rights except the rights that this man decides you have. There is no way not to take it personally: it affects you personally. The protesters are thus doing what little is left to them: the right guaranteed in the First Amendment to express their displeasure. It's one of the few rights explicitly guaranteed to them that even this judge would be forced to agree with. It may accomplish nothing more than making him miserable. But that's their right.