[opxnv]

I do not understand “trespass”. The Capitol is a US government building. Those people are US citizens. If such a thing had happened I could understand “breaking and entering” but what is the legal argument to accuse them of trespass?

[fwdude]

Capitol police were waiving them in. Not even trespassing would apply.

[Jim Noble]

I was present at the Capitol on November 15, 1969 along with hundreds of thousands of anti-Vietnam war protestors. The Capitol was open and accessible to everyone. You could knock on Mike Mansfield's door and ask to speak to him, and some people did. Seeing your own congressman was easier for a lot of people, although my own congressweasel was out of town.

The White House was surrounded, at least by the Ellipse, by a triple ring of busses and National Guardsmen. Tear gas was used to divert marchers down 14th Street from Constitution Avenue.

But access to the Capitol and the office buildings was never obstructed. The large concrete bollards were not there, then. There was no fence, there were no troops.

That was because entering the Capitol, in those days, did not require permission, so an "offense" of entering the Capitol without permission by definition could not exist.

The enormous increase in security at the Capitol (which has been going on for 30 years) is a perfect example of Proverbs 28:1.