4 ms·
Using the process seems like ‘abuse of process’ in cases like this where the protesters clearly violated the law and their obligations to their counterparty (in
by nickff 2y ago
Using the process seems like ‘abuse of process’ in cases like this where the protesters clearly violated the law and their obligations to their counterparty (in this case their employer).
- giraffe_lady 2y agoWell, whether they did that is not completely clear? That's what the process is there to decide right. But in any case and far more importantly protests have goals they want to achieve and being a pain in the ass is absolutely a valid tactic. Protest movements have rarely accomplished their aims by acting fully within the social preferences of their opponents.
- nickff 2y agoThe problem with this logic is that I’m not sure you’d want it applied when the tables are turned. How would you feel if Israel-supporting lawyers started filing frivolous nuisance suits against these protesters? Still fair game? Keep in mind that these junk suits (in both directions), have negative impacts on other people trying to access the justice system for legitimate reasons.
- giraffe_lady 2y agoThey already do that. And some or maybe all of these people will never be hired again because of zionist activism. Principled restraint from an effective technique has never deterred an opponent from using it themselves. Like look at the last decade of the democrats and their deference to decorum and what that has accomplished.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]