City Attorney Young also claimed to Officer Long that “he would be considering
applying for protection orders against some of the leaders in the protest groups that he felt were
especially threatening and intimidating

City Attorney Young claimed to Moore that he had been the victim of Intimidating
a Public Servant under RCW 9A.76.180, and sought criminal charges against Mr. Gibson.
City Attorney’s Office does not have lawful authority to file felony charges.
As Young did not himself have authority to file felony charges, he pressured
Moore to arrest Mr. Gibson on alleged felony charges so that Clark County Prosecuting
Attorney’s Office could file charges.
initiated an internal investigation into Sergeant Moore for
allegedly being sympathetic to “Joey Gibson” and allegedly being unsympathetic to Antifa

p. 43
On August 3, 2020, defense counsel for Ms. Carroll filed a motion to dismiss
charges filed by VCA, arguing that the charges were unconstitutional selective prosecution in
retaliation for speech in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
Constitution
Allowing defendants, to selectively target Mr. Gibson for arrest or prosecution
based on his position as a leader or organizer of a public prayer protest would irreparably harm
Mr. Gibson’s and his rights under First, Fifth, Fourteenth Amendments to United States
Constitution p46
Allowing defendants, to arrest or prosecute Mr. Gibson based on his participation
in a public protest or prayer would also cause irreparable harm to his rights under the First, Fifth,
Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution

More from braingarbage

In the MATTER OF Jones David HOLLISTER
A171609.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
July 8, 2020.
https://t.co/qB3G8IAtxS we must correctly interpret the statute.
Stull v. Hoke, 326 Or. 72, 77, 948 P.2d 722 (1997).
legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary

Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Mooney, Judge, and Hadlock, Judge pro tempore.

https://t.co/oJuecwvEKc


Bruce L. Campbell, John C. Clarke, and Miller Nash Graham & Dunn LLP filed the brief amicus curiae for Transgender Law Center, interACT, and Beyond Binary Legal.

Does ORS 33.460 permit the circuit court to grant a legal change of sex from male or female to nonbinary? The circuit court concluded that the statute does not permit such a change, and it denied petitioner's application under ORS 33.460
so @tedwheeler did you hear? today we are discussing "public whippings" thanks to @JamesBuchal

its a great chance to study the history of public beatings.
understandably, women feel threatened. https://t.co/jck05JGM4B
#PDX #tourism


FIRST OREGON WIFE-BEATER TO RECEIVE WHIPPING POST PUNISHMENT
https://t.co/3SJOODbuLf
PORTLAND. Or., June 7—The whipping post law passed at the last session of the Legislature was Into execution for the first time today, the victim being Charles Mcdlnty, convicted of wlfe-beatlng

whip was a braided blacksnake, made of rawhide, with four lashes. ..hustled to jail, stripped to the

waist, manacled, and his hands tied to the door high above his head. The whipping was as severe as the powerful deputy was capable of administering. Blood drawn on the 4th blow.

More from Court

1) God bless the State of Texas and @KenPaxtonTX What he has just done gives us every chance to save our Republic and our country.

Keep in mind that there are only a few instances where a party can file a direct lawsuit with the U.S. Supreme Court, a state claiming harm by

2) another state is one of those instances.

https://t.co/xvXGDdgDYh

Texas Attorney General @KenPaxtonTX has filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court seeking and emergency injunction against Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia “from taking action to


3) certify presidential electors or to have such electors take any official action including without limitation participating in the electoral college.”

@KenPaxtonTX argues that arbitrary changes made by the state’s governors, secretaries of states and election supervisors were

4) “inconsistent with relevant state laws and were made by non-legislative entities, without any consent by the state legislatures. The acts of these officials thus directly violated the Constitution.”

The lawsuit states: “these non-legislative changes … facilitated the casting

5) and counting of ballots in violation of state law, which, in turn, violated the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution.” […] “By these unlawful acts, the Defendant States have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens vote, but

You May Also Like