Quote of the Day
We also need to FOIA or subpoena any and all documents related to the writing and passage of these laws. If there is intent to deprive people of their rights, file a 1983 claim. If that bears fruit, then demand the feds file 18 USC 242 charges. You might only get a few with that one, like governors, they are chief LEO’s, but it would be a start.
zmunitions @zmunitions1
Tweeted on September 27, 2023
18 USC 242 is one of the laws I reference when I talk about “Enjoy your trial.” I first became aware of 18 USC 241 and 242 in 2003. Off and on I would bring it up, but few people said much about it.
In 2019, at my private urging, Brian K. came up with the #EnjoyYourTrial idea to promote those two laws. I have been using that for over four and a half years now with no apparent traction. I do not recall any public mention of 18 USC 241 or 242 in conjunction with violation of the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms… until the last 10 days:
- https://twitter.com/whitewlfz/status/1706369067509002558
- https://twitter.com/Insurgency2024/status/1706840216475181190
- https://twitter.com/AdamPiersen/status/1706139488747958781
- https://twitter.com/couleestomper/status/1704695472659505179
- https://twitter.com/couleestomper/status/1705447564298871084
- https://twitter.com/Thechadoflegend/status/1706687498393436270
- https://twitter.com/JustinJJJackson/status/1703860050190848423
- https://twitter.com/MadScientist_42/status/1706735538168827912
- https://twitter.com/MattinMiddletwn/status/1703798104527401027
- https://twitter.com/RatioDisputati/status/1703791158608982200
- https://twitter.com/danbowkley/status/1705377995899510800
I reularly see, in rulings granting preliminary injunctions against States and their officers, a question about surety bonds. Normally the surety bonds would be required of the plaintiffs.
What would it take to require surety bonds posted by the States and their officers?
Well, we are using lawyers to push it. So, it ain’t going anywhere in a hurry.
That being said, Since someone acting outside their constitutional duties has no standing under it. (Makes them a civilian.) Seems to me civil penalties should be on the table also. (Like me blocking a street so the firemen/EMT’s can’t get to my neighbor’s house. I should be held responsible.)
Doesn’t the governor of New Mexico deserve some homeless time for all her hard work?
To say nothing of Chucky, Nancy, and Ol’ slow Joe?
Elected officials who violate their sworn oath of office deserve a long fall attached to a short rope. I think it was Kim DuToit who popularized: “rope, tree, politician ( or journalist ) , some assembly required.”
I don’t think Americans in general had any idea 18 U.S.C. 241 and 242 existed until recently.
Specifically, Donald Trump’s 34 counts in Georgia: He is charged with — among other things — violating 18 U.S.C. 242 (and maybe 241) for allegedly depriving people of their right to vote and have their votes counted. I think many/most of the charges are bullsh!t, but there they are.
Suddenly, the two statutes are on the general public’s radar, and smart people are starting to see how they could be charged against ALL kinds of rights-depriving actions. There’s a definite “Streisand Effect” going on here — the more the bad actors try to conceal and obfuscate, the more apparent something shady is going on — and the public is starting to realize the possibilities.
The Left is so eager to destroy Trump, that they have made 18 U.S.C. 241 and 242 — statutes most of them are guilty of violating — common knowledge. Time will tell if the J6 protesters, who have been jailed for nearly 3 years without a trial or even formal charges filed, will have standing to petition for charges against the FBI, DoJ, and AG Garland.
One of the ongoing themes in the Q posts and discussion was “how do you get things (legally) entered into courts, into evidence, and so forth. One line of reasoning is that a lot of stuff is being allowed to be thrown at Trump and “validated” as reasonable by the left, and to set the precedence, is to let them get used in various ways against Trump.
We shall see if that is indeed partly or mostly true soon enough. Not as soon as I’d like, but considering how long a lot of this malarkey has been going on…. I’ll take a slow and solid win over a fast but meaningless one.
I follow Atty Robert Barnes on his social media site VivaBarnesLaw.Locals.com
In the members comment section, and verbally on his podcast Bourbon with Barnes, he mentions 241 and 242 whenever 2A litigation is in the daily news cycle (as do others that have law-oriented sites) but because no one is charged with (or appeals submitted that also reference them) that’s pretty much as far as it goes for now. This is a fairly recent activity though (last 3-4 months?).
The word is getting out, but I remain undecided on what is the next step I can personally instigate. I’m available if anyone wants to stir $%it up though.
Since the Feds clearly aren’t going to file 241/242 charges against anyone who is leftist, the question is can state/local officials file such charges. I think not since it is Federal law but IANAL and would be interested in hearing from someone that is a lawyer on this topic.
Note than even a Republican administration won’t fix this non-prosecution problem since the career employees in the DoJ Civil Rights Divisions are are hard core leftists that stand out even in the leftist DoJ.
LOL! As if the people in power will ever allow anyone to hold them accountable for their abuses of power. Nice idea. Never going to happen. The nasty reality is ANYONE in a position to prosecute someone under 18 USC 242 is also LIABLE under that code. NOBODY in a position to be charged under that code is ever going to be party to a prosecution using it. NO WAY are they going to allow any kind of precedent to be set. We’d have better luck trying to return the electoral process to an honest one.