From The Rutherford Institute <[email protected]>
Subject Should Trump Be Held Liable for Actions of Jan. 6 Protesters?
Date December 20, 2023 9:26 PM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
All freedoms hang together.

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
[link removed]



** For Immediate Release: December 20, 2023
------------------------------------------------------------


** Should Trump Be Held Liable for Actions of Jan. 6 Protesters? Case Could Chill Lawful, Peaceful First Amendment Activity
------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Weighing in on a case with far-reaching implications across the political spectrum for the future of free speech and the right to protest, The Rutherford Institute is asking the Supreme Court to ensure that protest organizers who peacefully lead First Amendment protests without intending to incite any violence are not held liable for the actions of others who engage in criminal activities ([link removed]) at the protests.

In an amicus brief ([link removed]) filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in Mckesson v. Doe, The Rutherford Institute argues that allowing protest organizers to be held liable for the independent actions of other protestors violates First Amendment protections and could chill First Amendment activities by discouraging future protests. Moreover, Institute attorneys warn that the outcome of Mckesson v. Doe could affect any protest, such as those related to abortion, gun rights, and pandemic mandates, as well as former President Trump’s liability for the events that occurred on January 6, 2021.

“Police have mastered the art of the double standard: they don’t want to be held accountable for their own misconduct or that of their fellow officers, but they want to throw the book at anyone who peacefully engages in constitutionally protected activities if that person is nearby when a cop gets hurt on the job,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People ([link removed]) . “This could chill constitutionally-protected civil rights protests through the use of retaliatory lawsuits as yet another Machiavellian attempt by the government to prevent Americans from exercising their First Amendment right to peacefully speak truth to power.”
HELP US MAKE THE GOVERNMENT PLAY BY THE RULES OF THE CONSTITUTION: $250,000 YEAR END CAMPAIGN UNDERWAY ([link removed])

Mckesson v. Doe involves a personal injury lawsuit by a police officer attempting to hold a protest organizer financially liable for injuries the officer obtained while carrying out his duties in response to a demonstration, even though the organizer himself did not cause the injury. In July 2016, activists demonstrated in front of the Baton Rouge Police Department’s headquarters to protest the escalating police violence directed at black men and women nationwide and demand accountability and reforms. During the protest, DeRay Mckesson, one of the event organizers, engaged in no acts of violence and did not incite or encourage violence by others. However, while the demonstration began peacefully, enraged protesters began throwing objects at police who were massed nearby preparing to make arrests. One officer was struck and injured by a rock thrown by an unknown protester.

The injured officer brought a personal injury lawsuit against Mckesson and the “Black Lives Matter” movement, seeking more than $75,000, claiming they knew or should have known that violence would erupt during the demonstration. The lawsuit was dismissed by the trial court, which ruled that Mckesson was engaged in constitutionally protected activity and there was no allegation that he authorized or directed any violent actions. But on appeal, the Fifth Circuit held that nothing in the First Amendment prohibits such liability based on negligence, allowing the officer’s lawsuit to proceed on the claim that Mckesson should have known police would respond to the protest, leading to violence by protesters. In its amicus brief ([link removed]) , The Rutherford Institute argues that the Fifth Circuit’s holding goes against the precedent of speech protections established by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Erin Glenn Busby, Lisa R. Eskow, and Michael F. Sturley with the University of Texas School of Law’s Supreme Court Clinic advanced the arguments in the Mckesson v. Doe amicus brief ([link removed]) .

The Rutherford Institute ([link removed]) , a nonprofit civil liberties organization, provides legal assistance at no charge to individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated and educates the public on a wide spectrum of issues affecting their freedoms.

This press release is also available at www.rutherford.org ([link removed]) .

Source: [link removed]
[link removed] Share ([link removed])
[link removed]: https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fshould-trump-be-held-liable-for-actions-of-jan-6-protesters Tweet ([link removed]: https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fshould-trump-be-held-liable-for-actions-of-jan-6-protesters)
[link removed] Forward ([link removed])
YOUR SUPPORT HELPS THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE SOUND THE ALARM OVER THREATS TO OUR FREEDOMS: DONATE TODAY ([link removed])

To donate via PayPal, please click below:
[link removed]

============================================================
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
CONTACT INFORMATION
Nisha Whitehead
(434) 978-3888 ext. 604
** [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])

THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE
Post Office Box 7482
Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482
Phone: (434) 978-3888
** www.rutherford.org ([link removed])

Copyright © 2023 The Rutherford Institute, All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because of your interest in the work of The Rutherford Institute. Founded in 1982 by constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute is a civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to people whose constitutional and human rights have been threatened or violated. To discontinue your membership electronically, or if you feel you are receiving this message in error, please follow the link below.

Under the regulations of the United States Internal Revenue Service, The Rutherford Institute is incorporated as a 501(c)(3) tax exempt nonprofit organization. Donations to support The Rutherford Institute’s legal and educational work help to safeguard the constitutional rights of all Americans. Donations are tax-deductible. In compliance with general industry standards of a nonprofit organization, the Institute is audited annually by an independent accounting firm.

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])

** update subscription preferences ([link removed])
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis