Michigan Senate Candidate Says She’d Hurl Beers at Conservative SCOTUS Justices if She Saw Them
“Democratic leaders are now vying to outdo each other in such violent ideations. They are fueling a rage addiction to achieve political power. It is a dangerous game…”
Democratic candidates for public office are increasingly contributing to the type of incendiary rhetoric about their political opposition that can lead to someone getting hurt or worse, and the latest example comes from the Senate race playing out in Michigan.
Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI), who has served in the Senate for the past ten years, is retiring after the 2026 midterm elections, prompting several Democratic candidates to declare their candidacies.
One of the more well-known examples is Rep. Haley Stevens (MI-11), who last week filed articles of impeachment against Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in what is clearly a political stunt.
Another is Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, who recently told a group of supporters that if she were to run into Supreme Court conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh or Amy Coney Barrett, she wouldn’t be able to restrain the urge to throw beers at them.
Someone in the audience asked her if there was “any sense” in contacting the Supreme Court Justices to express their displeasure, with the person stating that she blamed the Justices for “a lot.”
This was McMorrow’s response:
So I’m a Notre Dame grad, and Amy Coney Barrett coming out of my university makes me furious – just on a personal level. I talked to somebody yesterday who said they saw her with Brett Kavanaugh at a tailgate last weekend. I was like, I would not be able to control myself. That would be bad. There would be beers thrown in people’s faces.
Watch:
Mallory McMorrow threatens to hurl beers (?) at conservatives.
"My friend told me she saw Amy Coney-Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh at a tailgate. I would not have been able to control myself. There would be beers thrown in peoples' faces."
She needs help.pic.twitter.com/hPBPgWoyG0
— Senate Republicans (@NRSC) December 18, 2025
McMorrow’s comments were reminiscent of the threat Sen. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) issued in March 2020 during a pro-abortion rally in front of the Supreme Court as the justices were hearing a case on a Louisiana abortion law.
“I want to tell you, Gorsuch, I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price! You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions!” Schumer said, further whipping up the crowd. In June 2022, an unhinged Democrat attempted to assassinate Kavanaugh ahead of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
McMorrow is not the only Democratic Senate candidate to green-light an aggressive approach to dealing with their political opposition. Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner, who has been endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), went full Maxine Waters at a campaign event in November, telling supporters, “Frankly, I want people to follow them [Republicans] around and don’t let them have a public dinner without getting yelled at. Because that’s power. That’s real power.”
Here’s the audio of his remarks:
‘Don’t Let Them Have a Public Dinner Without Getting Yelled At’: Maine’s Platner Calls for Harassment of Lawmakers Who Oppose Medicare for All
‘I want people to follow them around,’ the Maine Democrat says
EXCLUSIVE @FreeBeacon ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/sIqzRnotEy
— Jessica Costescu (@JessicaCostescu) November 23, 2025
Over the summer, there was a report that quoted some Democratic members of the House as saying their base was telling them they wanted candidates who would be willing to fight dirty and shed blood if necessary to defeat Republicans:
The grassroots wants more. “Some of them have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot” when visiting ICE facilities or federal agencies, a third House Democrat told Axios.
- “Our own base is telling us that what we’re doing is not good enough … [that] there needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public,” the lawmaker said.
- A fourth House Democrat said constituents have told them “civility isn’t working” and to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy.”
Clearly, some of the candidates have taken that message to heart.
George Washington University law school Professor Jonathan Turley summed up the state of things accordingly on X in reaction to the McMorrow story:
Democratic leaders are now vying to outdo each other in such violent ideations. They are fueling a rage addiction to achieve political power. It is a dangerous game since today’s revolutionaries have a tendency to become tomorrow’s reactionaries. One day leading the mob; the next day running from the mob.
Sadly, with the midterms coming up, I fear their incendiary rhetoric is only going to get worse.
– Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via X. –
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
She seems to be a Peach
They can’t wait for Civil War II it seems, can they?
At least they are saying the quite part out loud so you know where they stand although Ilhan Omar still says she didn’t marry her brother.
They’ve got this strange fantasy where the military deposes Trump, arrests the conservative supreme court justices and disarms the public. They think they’ll be greeted with cheers and a grateful nation laying power their feet. They are bonkers.
Of course they’d be greeted with cheers. They would have saved Democracy, don’t cha know?
but they don’t really like democracy. They are trying to save Our Democracy™*
*Our Democracy™ is a trademark of the DNC. Any resemblance to actual democracies living or dead is coincidental.
They think they’ll win this time.
not a peach; merely the pit
Let her try. Then prosecute her for felony assault and remove her from any elected office she managed to get into. Federal prison is a good place for her brand of Democracy.
This really sounds like communicating a threat to me?
A supposedly responsible person, an elected State Legislator, declares if she was to encounter two members of SCOTUS at a athletic event that ‘I wouldn’t be able to control myself. That would be bad. There would be beers thrown in people’s faces’. Perhaps her confession of lack of ability to restrain violent impulses impulses should be followed up instead of casually dismissed, ignored or put down as hyperbole. IMO, when folks make specific threats of violence against specific people that’s not mere rhetoric, pretending otherwise is at best obtuse.
No, it’s not a threat. A threat is a positive statement that one will do something, said in such a manner that a reasonable person would believe that the speaker has both the means and the intent to actually do it. Any statement presented as a hypothetical, such as “If I were drafted and given a gun, the first person I would want in my sights would be the President”, is not a threat. Likewise in this case.
“”Any statement presented as a hypothetical, such as “If I were drafted and given a gun, the first person I would want in my sights would be the President”, is not a threat. Likewise in this case.””
Semantics is no defense against the possibility of taking bullet … evil people are not that nuanced …
It doesn’t matter whether you like it. This is the law. A person is free to tell a crowd on the Mall that “If I were drafted and given a gun, the first person I would want in my sights would be the President”, and any cop who would arrest him for it would not have qualified immunity, and would therefore lose his house and pension.
Your are correct on the law. We the people are not in a court of law. We the people should not vote for this idiot. Approximately half of us will do so anyway or worse because she said this.
Voters do not vote based on the “law”, but they should very much consider the tone, control, and stability of the speaker ~ none of which are good marks for voting for this as leadership.
Of course no one should vote for her. Even if there were nothing wrong with her personally, she’s still a Democrat. That she says Democrat things is only to be expected, and only reinforces the need to vote against her, but we already knew that. The question here is whether she’s committed a crime, and my answer is no, she hasn’t. She’s spoken about committing a crime, but in a free country she has the right to do that.
Nah, not really unless you consider all speech like this an assault or threat of an assault. I wouldn’t get too worked up over this myself.
But there is a limit …
The limit is at a true threat. It must be an actual positive statement that you will do something, and it must be one that a reasonable person would take seriously, meaning they would suppose you had both the intention and the means to act on it. It’s not necessary that you actually have the intent and the means, but it is necessary that a reasonable person would suppose you had them.
Me either, but I would find it funny if somebody kicked her square in the vag, really hard.
Another immature leftist running for office, I’m starting to lose count.
She illustrates what it looks like when a bisbehaving toddler who didn’t get spanked when she needed it gets to be an “adult”. “I’m me and I’m the most important person in the world so I don’t care about you.” She was told she could be anybody she wants and do anything she wants – and here we are.
.
Calling her with a misbehaving toddler is precisely on target. She’s the second generation that was raised with the negative lines of the feminist movement. This includes: “you can do anything a man can do and do it better”. May be off of it, but that’s what the essence is. It is the rare individual who can handle a position or career of extreme importance who does not have the brains, the behavior or the background to fulfill the job honestly.
“immature leftist”
Redundant.
Bimbo, might want to read Title 18 first.
what has gone wrong with youngish women these days?
Most of them have never been told “No” in their lives.
Kaiser’s Maxim remains undefeated: “The left will always, eventually, resort to violence, threats of violence, or glorification of violence to advance their agenda. Always.”
And the left lectures us on civility.
A tall drink of water, broad through the beam and big knockers. That’s about all there is to her.
She should really get an onlyfans channel.
Nice curves, though.
This is the new and modern leftist political technique of encouraging violence and assault against those they disagree with…because they can’t win ANY argument based on facts and logic.
There’s something that young boys learn early in their development from other young boys – running your mouth can lead to severe pain and lost teeth.
This is something that this young woman (and Joe Biden too, BTW) never learned. And it’s why teachers should stop with all the nonsense about curbing bullying. It’s all of a piece. Such lessons, learned in childhood, protect you from becoming a public *******.
Me thinks this young lady hasn’t read any of the SCOTUS decisions written by any of the justices she takes issue with. Similarly, she is probably smitten with Justice Jackson.
With spoken threats like she has made tells the voters that compromise is not in her vocabulary, which is an essential quality that any politician must have. Why is it that only Dems can threaten the SCOTUS and get away with it? Don’t these people know what a legislator’s job is? It’s to debate the other side and then reach an agreement, not our way or the highway!
At a recent Christmas party a sort-of friend was yammering about how we needed to “take back our democracy.” I usually just walk away, but instead I asked if he was basing his concerns on the Declaration or the Constitution. A bit confused, he replied that both are clear that our democracy is guaranteed to everyone and that anyone who tries to subvert it needs to be jailed and that there is a battle coming to protect “our democracy” from the likes of Trump. I told him the word “democracy” does not appear in either document, that in fact the founders distrusted democracy, and that only a fool would think that a battle between a bunch of soy boys and the people who own all of the firearms would not be pretty for his side. I’m pretty sure we won’t be speaking much any more.
People like this girl need to betaken out behind the barn by a grannie who owns one,
That sounds like a long-term WIN!
Talk is cheap, as is virtue signalling. Doubt she would do anything.
She would egg on some simp to act in her place and he probably would.
That’s the danger. These vile Dhimmi-crat apparatchiks who are either running for political office, or, who are currently in office, incite and give moral and political cover/justification for violence carried out against Jews, Christians and conservatives, to the innumerable terrorists/jihadists in their rabid/fanatical/wretched voter base.
The vile, stupid and evil neo-communist/Islamofascist Dhimmi-crats have gone full Bolshevik/jihadi, in their ideological fanaticism, They have no constraints placed upon their penchant for violence, either aspirationally, or, carried out in actuality.
“Grassroots” allegedly told House Demoncrats that they “need to be willing to get shot when visiting ICE facilities or federal agencies.”
I would approve of said shooting, if their actions warranted it.
Careful who you pick a fight with lady …
Conservative legal philosophy calls for applying duly enacted law per its plain wording and within the scope as to those which the law is applicable. Leftist officials are touting violent physical assault on conservatives for that originalist position. We live in interesting times.
What a disgusting woman. She’s demonstrated s lack of respect and decorum which “should” be evident for any candidate for public office. Of course, that isn’t a requirement Demonrats.
I’m almost as upset by the violence as I am by the waste of good beer.
Justice Kavanaugh might agree, given his history.
Who said anything about good beer?
no surprise she is preaching jizzman crookette philosophy
Picture yourself at a ball game and some dude you don’t know throws a beer in your face. What happens next?
Why should it be anything different for her?
If she were ever to do that, it wouldn’t be any different. But she hasn’t done it. And in a free country she has the right to make a donkey of herself by talking about doing it.