@JoshuaHolland I don't get it. Why are they suing the organization? If they're actually breaking the law and committing violence, arrest them. This smells like it'll get thrown out on 1A grounds.
@LouisIngenthron @JoshuaHolland Same reason you sue any business/corporation/organization that practices law breaking, harassment, etc. Regardless of which individuals are arrested. You take the f’g profit out of it so it isn’t easy for them to keep on causing problems. You’re welcome.
@LouisIngenthron Taking their assets prevents them from continuing to carry on without consequences. Someone is funding them. Taking that away, makes it harder for them to organize and to pay legal costs. Are you deliberately trying to miss the point?
@Catawu That's only if you win the suit, and even then, the penalties are usually relatively minor.
But either way, you also validate their persecution complex, giving them a clear message to fundraise on.
Just look at Trump. Every time a new development in one of his 30+ cases breaks, the donor texts go out.
On the other side, Planned Parenthood also sees big revenue boosts whenever Roe is further dismantled by the courts.
If your goal is to bankrupt them, this is a failing strategy.
@LouisIngenthron Yeah, just let them run around unchallenged. Why fight back? Why win? You’re right. Nobody should do anything because the liars will just lie more. Perfect logic. Flawless. Have a wonderful day.
@Catawu Or you could arrest them when they commit violence, as I said above.
Believe it or not, there's a wide gulf between "do nothing" and "unconstitutional prior restraint".
@LouisIngenthron Arrest them and not take their property? What about those organizations that fund, train, nurture the violence? Leave ‘em be? Ignore them? You have no clue how the real world works, and that must be so very, very nice for you.
@Catawu I'm pretty sure you can have asset forfeiture in criminal cases.
@LouisIngenthron So only violence is criminal and only criminal involves forfeiture? You don’t do much law, do you.
@Catawu Your endless straw men and arrogance are getting tiresome.
If you'd prefer to engage with the arguments I've made instead of the ones you've imagined, I'll engage. If not, then goodbye.
@LouisIngenthron How is imposing financial consequences for bad/harmful acts, “Unconstitutional or Prior Restraint”?
@LouisIngenthron BTW, a mother and son bankrupted a White Supremacist group, even got their lands. But I’m sure you look at it as because it didn’t completely eradicate all WS, it was for naught.
Ruby and Shay just won a big one over one of the biggest racists out there. But yeah, he’ll just use it for fundraising so, why bother?
@Catawu That sounds good. If they were harmed, they should sue. That's different from the government suing.
@LouisIngenthron So, judges can’t impose fines for crimes against the State? No financial consequences because there was no ‘violence’? Pull your head out man.
@Catawu I never claimed anything of the sort.
@LouisIngenthron Your logic is weak. You didn’t claim it per se, but your line of logic led only to that destination. Perhaps think about the next logical steps so you don’t get ‘misunderstood’.
@LouisIngenthron You are wrong. You think they don’t have assets and fund their activities? You think they are maybe a charity? LOL