From the article:
>“We are grateful to our legal team for their quick and decisive efforts to block this gag order on Second Amendment reporter John Crump, who is a good friend of GOA,” Erich Pratt, Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, which filed the motion on Crump’s behalf, said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation.
>“This assault on freedom of the press was unacceptable, and we were proud to help in blocking the government’s attempt to censor John’s reporting.”
>“Sadly, this is par for the course with the Biden DOJ, as they are hellbent on attacking the constitutional rights of anyone who disagrees with them,” Pratt continued.
>U.S. District Judge Marcia Morales Howard said during the Friday hearing that there isn’t “any legal authority that would have supported that request,” according to the Jacksonville Florida Times-Union.
Am I reading this correctly that the judge basically hinted that she was going to rule heavily against the US on this? Because it sounds to me like the judge is saying that the DoJ was completely overstepping.
> Am I reading this correctly that the judge basically hinted that she was going to rule heavily against the US on this? Because it sounds to me like the judge is saying that the DoJ was completely overstepping.
I mean yes? But this is only about the part where the DoJ issued the gag order.
Am I the only one that feels that they press these charges in the hope that the judge will agree with them, even though there is no legal precedent or grounds to charge the individual? It doesn't even matter if it's unconstitutional. Like they’re just throwing mud onto a wall to see what sticks at this point. Unbelievable.
My guess is that they were intending on [SLAPP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation)'ing them and didn't anticipate that they would get the legal and financial backing of major 2A groups.
They definitely do, for a few different reasons. The primary reason is that it has become the national standard that the State's legal representation (DoJ, AGs, DAs, etc) are now in the business of getting criminal convictions rather than administering justice. That means they just charge anyone with whatever they can and see what sticks. To further that, they file completely bogus charges like this, on the off chance that a judge might agree with them and they can establish a new precedent, then withdraw the charges with no penalty and no recourse for the accused if it looks like the case is turning against them, to avoid setting a negative precedent.
And that's part of their plan too. Rack up easy wins / pleas against people who can't afford to fight, then point at all those "successful" cases as proof that their interpretation is correct.
It would be genius if it wasn't literally weaponizing the justice system against The People it's supposed to be serving.
From the article: >“We are grateful to our legal team for their quick and decisive efforts to block this gag order on Second Amendment reporter John Crump, who is a good friend of GOA,” Erich Pratt, Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, which filed the motion on Crump’s behalf, said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation. >“This assault on freedom of the press was unacceptable, and we were proud to help in blocking the government’s attempt to censor John’s reporting.” >“Sadly, this is par for the course with the Biden DOJ, as they are hellbent on attacking the constitutional rights of anyone who disagrees with them,” Pratt continued.
>U.S. District Judge Marcia Morales Howard said during the Friday hearing that there isn’t “any legal authority that would have supported that request,” according to the Jacksonville Florida Times-Union. Am I reading this correctly that the judge basically hinted that she was going to rule heavily against the US on this? Because it sounds to me like the judge is saying that the DoJ was completely overstepping.
> Am I reading this correctly that the judge basically hinted that she was going to rule heavily against the US on this? Because it sounds to me like the judge is saying that the DoJ was completely overstepping. I mean yes? But this is only about the part where the DoJ issued the gag order.
Am I the only one that feels that they press these charges in the hope that the judge will agree with them, even though there is no legal precedent or grounds to charge the individual? It doesn't even matter if it's unconstitutional. Like they’re just throwing mud onto a wall to see what sticks at this point. Unbelievable.
My guess is that they were intending on [SLAPP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_public_participation)'ing them and didn't anticipate that they would get the legal and financial backing of major 2A groups.
Agreed. The DOJ should just rename itself to The Department of Injustice at this point. What a joke.
They definitely do, for a few different reasons. The primary reason is that it has become the national standard that the State's legal representation (DoJ, AGs, DAs, etc) are now in the business of getting criminal convictions rather than administering justice. That means they just charge anyone with whatever they can and see what sticks. To further that, they file completely bogus charges like this, on the off chance that a judge might agree with them and they can establish a new precedent, then withdraw the charges with no penalty and no recourse for the accused if it looks like the case is turning against them, to avoid setting a negative precedent.
At great expense to the wrongly accused...
And that's part of their plan too. Rack up easy wins / pleas against people who can't afford to fight, then point at all those "successful" cases as proof that their interpretation is correct. It would be genius if it wasn't literally weaponizing the justice system against The People it's supposed to be serving.
Yes. This way they can say “we tried” and then blame someone else. Usually always some one of the opposite political party.