Aggressive Anti-Israel Protestors Arrested Outside Chuck Schumer’s Brooklyn Home
“organized by Jewish Voice for Peace — a self-described anti-Zionist activist group”
Hundreds of protesters descended on the Brooklyn home of Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) this weekend, demanding the U.S. end aid to Israel and a ceasefire.
Dozens of arrests were made, which is ironic if you consider this point from Mollie Hemingway.
Nothing was done to stop protesters at Supreme Court justices’ homes. https://t.co/hbe13adjOn
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) October 14, 2023
From the New York Post:
Dozens of protesters demanding Israel-Hamas ceasefire arrested outside Schumer’s NYC home
Local lawmakers were among dozens of demonstrators demanding a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war who were arrested outside New York Sen. Chuck Schumer’s Brooklyn home on Friday night, according to police sources.
Hundreds of people gathered at the Grand Army Plaza for the rally, organized by Jewish Voice for Peace — a self-described anti-Zionist activist group — before marching a few blocks to the senator’s Park Slope residence and blocking the street.
“New York Jews blocking @SenSchumer’s home demanding a ceasefire NOW,” Jewish Voice for Peace Action wrote on X.
Protesters held a large banner that read, “Jews say stop genocide against Palestinians” in front of Schumer’s building’s door with several police officers standing nearby.
Police were seen escorting dozens of handcuffed detainees onto MTA buses and driving away.
It’s a shame Brett Kavanaugh didn’t get this kind of protection at his house.
Protestors in front of SCOTUS' houses get a pass but don't protest in front of Schumer's place.
"Up to 100 pro-Palestine protesters demanding US halt aid to Israel are arrested outside Jewish Dem. Senator Chuck Schumer's NYC home"https://t.co/fbAa3CnYkr
— JohnX HamblinX (@JohnDHamblin) October 14, 2023
Here’s a video report:
These protesters might be disappointed to know what Schumer is doing right now.
From the Times of Israel:
Schumer to lead bipartisan senators group to Israel to show ‘unwavering’ US support
Ahead of a trip to Israel this weekend, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer says an upcoming administration request for wartime funding could include aid for both Israel and Ukraine.
Schumer — the first Jewish Senate majority leader and the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in the US — is leading a bipartisan delegation of senators to Israel this weekend to express support for the country amid its week-old war against Hamas. He told The Associated Press in an interview that he wants to make clear that the United States stands with Israel and also show bipartisan support.
“To have a bipartisan delegation, led by the majority leader saying strongly and unequivocally we’re with Israel is going to make a big difference to Israelis,” Schumer said.
The radical left’s position on this situation is maddening and sad.
Featured image via YouTube.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Do they really think Schumer could do anything?
I don’t like the guy but this situation is out of his control.
His name got them news coverage, which is what they wanted.
“Nothing was done to stop protesters at Supreme Court justices’ homes.”
The hypocrisy is astounding. This incident is a great example of why it’s important conservatives need to win local, county, and state elections.
Not true. Had those protesters blocked the road they would have been arrested too. And had these protesters stayed on the sidewalk and merely marched past Schumer’s apartment they would have been left alone.
Amazing how you continually need to school the idiots on this site.
The protesting of US judges, jurors, court officers is a federal crime. They should have been arrested irrespective if the flow of traffic on the street was impeded.
18 U.S. Code § 1507 – Picketing or parading :Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
No, it is not. Not only isn’t it a crime, it can’t be. Congress lacks the authority to make it a crime, and any law that purports to do so is automatically invalid.
But the law you cite doesn’t even purport to do so. The key words are “with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty”. The protests at the Supreme Court justices’ homes had no such intent. They were intended not to influence the justices but simply to protest what the justices were doing.
The protesters had no illusions that the justices would change their votes because of their disagreement; they were simply expressing that disagreement, and letting the justices, their neighbors, and passersby know how strongly they were offended by the justices’ impending action. And that is protected speech, which Congress cannot ban.
But they still couldn’t do it on the roadway, or even block passage on the sidewalk, nor could they do it at too high a volume for the time of day, or break any other generally applicable law. Any of them who did so were arrested, just as those who broke the law during this completely legal protest against Schumer were.
You’re describing the defense that the defendants could have employed at trial. The prosecution would have argued – likely with success – that the protestors would trying to move the court in a specific direction after the unprecedented public leak of a prospective opinion.. That statute was created for the express purpose of stopping what these protestors were trying to accomplish.
“But the law you cite doesn’t even purport to do so”
It doesn’t?
“But the law you cite doesn’t even purport to do so. The key words are “with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty”
Okay. Interfering with the discharge of their duty.
“They were intended not to influence the justices but simply to protest what the justices were doing.”
Please describe, in detail, how ‘discharging their duty’ is NOT something judges do.
Do you even understand what law is?
Hint–it’s not your random opinions.
TargaGTS, that is not only what the defense would argue, it’s what the plaintiffs would successfully argue in a section 1983 lawsuit against the individual police officers who arrested them, who would not have qualified immunity and would lose their houses and pensions. There is literally no evidence and no reason to believe that they were trying to induce the justices to change their votes, let alone enough for the prosecution to prove that non-existent intent beyond reasonable doubt.
The Montgomery County DA also said he doubted the corresponding MD statute was constitutional even with such intent, at least when applied in urban environments, so he had a duty not to try to enforce it, and instructed the local police accordingly. (The corresponding VA statute appears unconstitutional on its face.)
Azathoth, you seem incapable of reading basic English. Not only were the demonstrators not “interfering with the discharge of the [justices’] duty”, the statute doesn’t even say that. It bans demonstrations with the intent “of influencing any judge […] in the discharge of his duty”. The “interfering” clause is separate, and doesn’t even apply to “any judge”, etc. That’s just basic English, that anyone fluent in the language can plainly see. Not that it’s relevant, since they weren’t doing that anyway, but when you start by misreading the statute we don’t even have to disagree about the facts.
The MD and VA protesters did not break any law, and that is why they were not arrested. Those of the NY protesters who stayed on the sidewalk were not arrested either. The administration of justice in these separate cases, in completely different jurisdictions, was nevertheless equal.
Double standards!
No, No, Merrick Garland has assured us that the law is applied equally without prejudice
It’s got nothing to do with Garland.
I agree with little d with this
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/10/15/desantis-every-republican-running-for-president-should-pledge-u-s-cannot-accept-gaza-refugees/
Except, of course, if they walk in over the southern border, at which point they become indistinguishable from any other droplet in the blue tsunami.
Schumer isn’t Jewish. His religion is Leftism.
No, money
He’s still Jewish. It doesn’t matter what he believes; his mother was a Jew, therefore he is one too. His wife is also Jewish, and therefore so are his daughters and his grandson, regardless of what they may or may not believe.
Judaism is a belief system.
Not a race.
You can be born to Jewish parents, if your parents are observant Jews. Even if that observance is minimal.
If you are not observant, you are not a Jew. You may be able to say that you were RAISED Jewish, or that your ancestors were Jewish, but if you do not observe, you are not a Jew.
Jews are a type of Caucasian.
The idea that if one’s mother is a Jew one is Jewish is a matter of Judaiac law, not genetics.
Good L-rd. Now you presume to lecture me on a subject you know nothing about, and I am expert in.
Jews are a nation. Judaism is a religious and legal system that that nation has, which most of its members do not believe in or observe. Being Jewish does not depend on such belief or observance, any more than US citizenship depends on believing in its foundational values or observing the law.
No, being Jewish has nothing whatsoever to do with what you believe, or what your parents or grandparents believed. There are third-generation atheist Jews, Catholic Jews, Buddhist Jews, etc.
No, even if that observance is completely non-existent and not even claimed. And even if your father is not a Jew at all.
That is just plain wrong. Cardinal O’Connor was every bit as Jewish as Moses himself, even though he didn’t even know about it until he arrived in the Next World.
Jewish law is what defines who is Jewish, just as US law defines who is USAn. It is the height of presumption for you to dismiss that law on its own turf. That’s exactly like claiming that NY law doesn’t define what is a crime in NY.
You’ll notice Jewish Voice for Peace is so Jewish that they held their protest on Friday night, in violation of the laws of Shabbos.
Self loathing liberal Jews gather in front of a Jewish Senator’s home.
not like they think he is any different from him….
Yeah, blame it on the Jews again. And again.
Most likely has extremely few actual Jewish members. Like all leftwing groups that pretend to have a specific cause or group of people, they would throw them into the fire to push the leftwing narrative,
Yep. Legal Insurrection has had some reporting over the years on JVP members who are not in fact Jews.
I came here to say that…
Nice 2 tier justice system you have there Chucky, it’s good to be the sheriff.
Brooklyn is tougher on crime and more no nonsense when it comes to protesting in residential neighborhoods than VA and Maryland. Didn’t have that on the ’23 bingo card.
Invalid point. Those protesters didn’t block the road. They just marched past on the sidewalk, over and over. Had these people done the same they would not have been arrested either.
He did.
“The radical left’s position on this situation is maddening and sad.”
And as completely predictable as AOC saying something end-stage stupid and President Pudding Cup tripping on Air Force One stairs.
Imagine the national coverage this story would be getting these protesters were wearing MAGA hats.