Karl Rove hasn’t heard about the First Amendment I guess.
Protests should be OK unless they harm life or property for starters.
Rove’s real motive is legislation to prevent patriots from protesting outside the homes of RINO’s like him when they take away our Second Amendment rights as they are slowly doing under the pressure of emotional events.
"Williams said, “You have a right to protest anywhere in America. Now clearly, these people should not be violent, and they shouldn’t threaten. But the idea that they’re influencing. I don’t think it’s about the influence. I think it’s about a Supreme Court that’s become radical, and extremist, and activist and is going to put out a decision that’s going to — believe me — polarize this country. Undo 50 years of law.”"
That being said, I think it's against the law to protest in front of judges houses.
The statute applies to judges and jurors, not everyone. Its purpose is to prevent undue influence being exercised on judges or jurors, something that does not apply in the case of ordinary people. Further, the mere presence of a crowd in front of a judge’s or juror’s home carries an inherent threat because anyone in that crowd could be carrying a gun or other weapon. In this case we saw exactly that happen when a particular thug, dressed in Antifa black and equipped with a full arsenal of murder and kidnapping weapons, appeared in front of Justice Kavanaugh’s house. That was a profound threat of violence designed for one purpose: to terrorize Kavanaugh into into changing his potential vote on the abortion issue. After all, how would you feel if you were a litigant in a case and your opponent was able to intimidate the judge into ruling against you when the law and facts were on your side? Karl Rove made an excellent point.
That’s completely ridiculous - the First Amendment does not permit people to harass people and their families at their private homes - that is not “peaceable assembly.” Moreover, this is being done to intimidate and affect legal rulings in their capacity as a judge - that also is not something protected by the First Amendment.
Harassment that has an affinity to violence is “free speech” to you?