‘It’s wrong, it’s intimidation, it’s against the law!’ Bill Maher goes off on SCOTUS protests

Increasingly heterodox liberal comedian Bill Maher has once again sided with the right, this time by expressing his disgust and opposition to the protests occurring outside the homes of the Supreme Court’s conservative justices, as well as the Biden administration’s tacit endorsement of said protests.

He offered the surprising remarks Friday after one of his “Real Time” guests, political scientist Ian Bremmer, slammed “progressive” Democrats for purposefully ginning up the mob instead of working to simply codify Roe v. Wade into law.

Recall that earlier this week, the Senate tried passing a bill that would have gone way beyond just codifying Roe v. Wade into law. It would have instead also pretty much outlawed every abortion restriction in the country.

Bremmer believes that had Democrats simply stuck to trying to codify Roe v. Wade, the bill would have likely made it through the Senate.

“The Senate had the ability to get Joe Manchin, to get a number of Republican senators if they had just put out legislation that said are you in favor of maintaining Roe vs. Wade, but they didn’t. And they didn’t do it because the progressives wanted to be able to drive more of a spike on this issue,” he said.

“So much of what we’re seeing right now is unprecedented compared to the days of 1992. You didn’t have opinions leak. You didn’t have people, masses, demonstrating outside of the houses of Supreme Court justices.”

The part about “masses demonstrating” outside the homes of the high court’s conservative justices provoked a response from Maher.

“What do you think about that? Should that be allowed, because certainly the press spokesperson at the White House is down with this. Jen Psaki said, when asked about this … ‘I don’t have an official U.S. government position on where people protest,'” he said.

That she did:

“But we do! I think it’s wrong, it’s intimidation, it’s against the law. … I mean, look, it’s not terribly violent, obviously, but would you want this outside your house?” Maher then added.

He was correct.

As 18 U.S.C. § 1507, known as the “Pickering or Parading” law, states unequivocally, anyone “with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer in the discharge of his duty,” cannot picket or parade “in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge.”

Critics have accused the protesters of demonstrating for the sole purpose of trying to persuade the justices to change their minds about overturning Roe v. Wade. If true, this would make their protests illegal. However, proving this would be difficult, according to legal scholar Jonathan Turley.

“I mean, is the motivation there to get them to change their mind? Or is it just rage? What I see is just rage. I mean, that actually makes it worse in many respects. I don’t think they’re trying to achieve anything but harassment and retaliation. But I do think that if you brought a prosecution, it would raise some serious constitutional questions. And I would not bet on that being upheld on appeal,” he said in a Wall Street Journal interview earlier in the week.

Fair enough, though to be clear, there have been past 18 U.S.C. § 1507 convictions before:

Continuing the HBO “Real Time” discussion, Maher’s second guest, former Democrat Rep. Jane Harman, conceded his point about the protests likely being illegal and argued that “It would be much better” for protesters to hold “a major rally” in Washington, D.C.

Perhaps, though again, if the protests were to occur outside the Supreme Court building, they too could be accused of being a form of intimidation.

Despite Maher calling out the protesters and the Biden administration, rest assured he still remains a die-hard liberal at heart.

One who, earlier on the show, made it seem like Roe v. Wade being overturned would lead to some states — the red ones, of course — turning into hellholes for women.

“Look at some of the things that are being proposed in some of these states. I mean, Louisiana says flat-out it’s a homicide. So when you drive from LA to Nevada, on one side of the border, you’re just a free person. The other side, you’re a criminal. You can fly across the country and gain and lose your reproductive rights 20 times. How can America sustain that?” he said.

But as Maher himself noted just a week earlier, most pro-life Americans are women, so to them, these red states would be utopias, not hellholes …

DONATE TO AMERICAN WIRE

If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to American Wire News to help us fight them.

Thank you for your donation!
Vivek Saxena

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles