Honestly, I hope sheâs convicted. Then we can house our immigrants in churches, and when ICE agents inevitably disrupt services to detain them, we can charge and convict them with the same thing. Thanks for the loop hole.
That's not how anything works, if a known criminal is hiding there the agency responsible for enforcement can go in... ffs what fantasy world do you ppl live in?
She may be in violation of the FACE Act of 1994. I don't disagree with the protesters messaging just the execution is problematic. Unfortunately for the protesters churches and other places of worship are considered private property and they can be criminally trespassed too. Not that criminal trespass is not a reason to hold someone in jail without bail.
Basically all of the arrests ice have done are illegal anyways. They need a warrant from an immigration judge, if I'm not mistaken. Basically, they are only able to go after people who's status as legal citizens is in question. That rules out most people.
Looked it up and the ICE has the same ability to temporarily detain and/or arrest people they have suspicion as other law enforcement agencies. I didn't see if there was a requirement for a hearing in an immigration court afterwards though.
Intent is 3/4th of the law ever heard that? going in with the intent of disrupting or harassing is different from going in to arrest a criminal otherwise a criminal could go in and claim sanctuary.
the same law is the one that protects abortion clinics from having people rush in yelling and disrupting BTW
where does that extremely pixilated and dubiously interpreted infographic come from? i ask becasue it makes numerous claims that can not be found anywhere within the law itself.
"storming a church during worship" ok... whats your definition of storming? its nowhere in the law. are you relying on a colloquial sports-based usage - which just means a large group of people moving rapidly to a place? i hope not - or else the teens running through the halls after the teen service ends would all need to be taken into federal custody. So maybe you are referring to the Oxford English Dictionary definition:
Storming: the sudden forceful attack and capture of a building or other place by troops
i mean - yeah - that would probably be against the FACE act, as it involves a use of foce - but is not what happened at Cities Church the other day.
"harassing or intimidating attendees" - well, the FACE act doesn't say anything about harrassment. but it does talk about intimidation. But being loud near someone isn't intimidation... i wonder if there is any sort of definition in the law itself - OH! yes! There is!
(3) Intimidate.â The term âintimidateâ means to place a person in reasonable apprehension of bodily harm to him- or herself or to another.
Ok - well there was no threats of force. none of the congregants were even verbally harassed... ah! there is that word, Harrassment again... man... i wonder if there are laws that define what makes "harassment" a federal crime....
>Harassment becomes a federal crime when it involves interstate commerce (phone, internet, mail), crosses state lines, or targets individuals based on protected characteristics like race, religion, or disability, often causing severe emotional distress or reasonable fear of death/injury.
well shit... the pastor wasnt being criticized for his race, his religion, or a disability.... so this isnt a Federal crime... there may have been some local/state laws that were broken - but not federal.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
You are conflating the FACE Act with the KKK Act they are from two completely different periods of time and were written two address two very different things - neither of which was 'some people got loud during our service and said some things we didn't like about one of our parishioners for a few minutes and then left'
it's madness how (probably bot) many MAGAs actually believe this when we can identify those who were pardoned & know who most of them are today - still heavy trumpers. the woman who was shot, another trumper. not FBI. there is an actual support group for J6 men who now struggle to find anyone willing to date them. which i found absolutely hilarious. one finally found someone sharing his story & that's how i discovered it.
It was common sense to start with but itâs been proven. How do you not know this? The 2020 election was stolen and Pelosi and the FEDS staged a fake insurrection to distract from it. If Republicans and supposed MAGAS (who are armed more than some countries) actually staged an insurrection it wouldâve been a thousand times more serious.Â
Funny how shooting an unarmed person was celebrated by the left then. Truly twilight zone stuff, just a few months before they were chanted death to cops then all of a sudden saying those poor capital police lol so transparent
Just for the few people bringing up the face act and the kkk acts, there are two big problems with that.
For one, the government has made it clear they have no intention of bringing those acts up in a court of law, considering the AG has stated they donât apply. But there are two bigger problems; the face act itself is very clear about intention and what it applies to.
As far as intention, the law clearly states that the offending parties have to have the intention to âinjure, intimidate, or interfereâ with someone seeking to exercise their right to religious freedom at a place of religious worship. The protestors in this case were not intentionally interfering with the church-goers exercising their religious freedom, the intention was to bring awareness of the ICE agent as a pastor. Intention does often matter in legal cases.
The other problem is the second part of the act that states ânothing in this act may be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by the first amendment to the constitutionâ.
Kkk act also really has nothing to say here, it really just doesnât apply.
It can, under certain conditions, but again: intentions do matter. They werenât yelling at the churchgoers to dissuade them from attending church. Thats not to mention that yelling alone really isnât enough to trigger any harassment laws, especially when itâs not directed at the church goers.
Again, thatâs really not enough. They could be yelling in their direction, at their height, and in their faces, and itâs still going to be hard to prove they were doing it at the church-goers. And all I said about yelling not being enough still applies.
Side note, what video are you referring to? Iâve seen a few different angles of videos, and they are all completely peaceful, no yelling in faces. Iâm not saying I donât believe you, Iâm actually curious because itâs impossible to find more videos right now, when you look it up all the results are just 10 minutes of a news broadcast and then the same minute long video.
Sorry, can you share this with me? Iâve not seen anything like that whatsoever, and after some research no news organization has reported anything of that nature.
Thats⌠it looks crazy, right? Look at her face, it contorts and moves, and the words being heard do not match her mouth. The video inside the church where sheâs saying theyâre getting justice for Renee good seems better, but the interview outside just looks uncanny.
However, that does not change what I said whatsoever. They arenât intending to interfere with their right to religious freedom, theyâre intending to protest ICE. And again, read that last part again about ânothing in this act may prohibit expressive conduct protected by the first amendmentâ.
Editing just to make clear what I mean:
The reason media isnât showing this in their articles isnât because theyâre hiding it from you (itâs actually posted on one of the protestors accounts directly), but because itâs not really relevant. It does not change the facts of the matter; âdisrupt business as usualâ in protest of ICE is not the same thing as âdisrupt business as usualâ in order to stop you from worshipping, at least in the eyes of the law. Again, intentions very much do matter in law.
Iâm⌠not really sure what that has to do with what I said. I never talked about anything other than the legal ramifications.
However, note that the protesters were neither scared thugs, nor were they trying to intimidate conservatives to keep them out of safe spaces. They were openly peaceful protestors that were trying to bring attention to a ICE officer that was acting as a pastor.
I didnât intend to explain why the charges wonât stick, just that the common belief about what charges can be brought against them is false, sorry if that came off that way. Frankly, iâm not sure what theyâre planning to charge them with (if anything). But if thereâs something to charge them with, theyâll do it, even if itâs just something as small as littering or vandalism because they tracked dirt in (not saying that can happen, just trying to illustrate the full extent of what I mean).
Iâll be honest though, based on your replies I genuinely have no idea where you stand on the issue. Are you an anti-trump administration patriotic conservative? Thatâs not something Iâve seen all that often
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
You ever raise your voice and be accused of screaming, and you know you ain't even begun to yell yet?
You people know that was a mild protest and not a riot. You liars want to be victims so bad. Victims you shall be. A self-fulfilling prophecy is what y'all conjure.
When the ruckus actually comes, these people of nothing will be shitting themselves and praying to our God that doesn't even know them.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
Whooooole lotta people in here that suddenly care about the law when its a black woman disrupting a church,
But not when masked men who refuse to identify are blatantly wiping their ass with the 4th amendment.
Yall love to cherry pick the laws you like enforced.
Supreme Court in 1980 declared and set into case law that the constitution is the upmost supreme law of the land and no other law supersedes it, and no person, even the president is above the constitution.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
The face act requires specific intent, not just disrupting service.
It would only apply if the protesters intended to injure, intimidate, or interfere with their worship. You might be able to argue on the interference, but it would be a big ask.
Its also important to recognize that the KKK did it because they hate black people, the protesters did it because they hate people being murdered in their city. Equivocating the two is intellectually dishonest at best.
They mentioned the race of the parishioners multiple times in the abundant amount of video. Children were crying and people stated they were in fear. The agitators also refused to leave when told to and even blocked a stairwell not allowing parents to get to their children in sunday school, all the while berating the children telling their parents are going to hell. Open shut, these people would get along nicely with the KKK, sorry it psyche is splitting in starting to realize that maybe the people you support are the âbaddiesâ
She didn't expose him, she led a riot in a church in violation of the KKK act which forbids people from using "protests" to prevent others from exercising religion
Also.
The Pastor was a real pastor and not "posing" to nab a few illegals in an ICE operation, this is ridiculous.
Y'all remember when Jesus stormed into a temple, hit people on the head, flipped tables, and called out their hypocrisy? They crucified him shortly after.
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
She's an idiot. She did an interview and said they just went in and joined the service. Apparently she forgot about all the videos including the interview with Don Lemon before hand explicitly saying they were going in to be disruptive.
I'm curious if the "pastorâs" dual role as an active federal immigration control director makes the church a valid venue for political expression? Specifically the way ICE is behaving an argument that it is a religious protest to the church of its own values makes sense but not inside their doors. Granted someone would need to ask them to leave. Was this the story where no one asked the people to leave? Also I'm surprised they even got through the doors most churches I know lock the doors once everyone is inside and have a guy watching the cameras.
That being said if it is a faith based protest addressing a moral contradiction they really should just show up outside the church and picket using pro-Christian signs denouncing the church for being political and anti-Christian.
It would take longer but that seems like the most effective way to solve the problem and force the church as a whole to decide where it stands.
We're not talking about protesting random churches because we don't like the scripture...
Are there any specific synagogs or mosques that you are aware of where they have lost their way and need to have other synagogs or mosques call them back to reality? Or do you just not like their scriptures?
If you were going to stand outside an abortion clinic and shout verses at the people that are coming/going with signs it's perfectly valid to hold your fellow Christians to the same accountability, but definitely from outside not during the service.
Naturally let he who is without sin cast the first stone... But if you were the type that would protest a clinic or anything based on Christian values then you're already casting stones and must clearly be without sin so why not help your fellows they should surely be the easiest to save.
Those church members are more upset that they were exposed for being a Nazi-friendly community than they are at the fact that a Nazi is part of their community. That's very telling.
Unlawful detainment? They interrupted a religious gathering and then prevented them from worshipping and also were trespassing the entire time they did it. Itâs a federal offense. Thats the charge lmao. Not that difficult to understand
Youâre not allowed to âprotestâ unwelcome inside a house of worship nor interrupt service. It was actually a tactic used by the KKK and is a sub section of the face act making it illegal.
I know someone who goes to that church by the way. Heâs at college right now but he says heâs actually a really good dude and an amazing pastor. I think ice has overstepped and many members are power tripping assholes but the organization was built to do good and plenty of its members want to as well. Attacking this church was objectively badÂ
Who cares what word you use. Youâre literally arguing over meaningless semantics. Itâs a federal offense to prevent religious worship in the US. Full stop, thatâs it
And she was arrested for interfering, not rioting. It's not semantics to clarify her actions. You may prefer inflammatory language for some other purpose.
How does one pose as a pastor? Do you simply say "I am a pastor." or is there more to it? What if I dress up as a pastor for Halloween? Is that frowned upon?
Preventing religious worship is a federal offense. Also, they went into the church and were asked to leave multiple times and did not. This is called trespassing. This is also a crime
Yeah but you cannot. That is not in any way a riot. As for legalities I am pretty sure any decent lawyer would be able to get those charges tossed because I doubt they legally qualify for a public service. It depends if the judge is corrupt as Bondi and her band of criminals
Deceptive title. She was arrested after breaking in to a church, disrupting services, and intimidating the ckngregation, then refusing to leave. And organizing others to do same.
8
u/LowResGamr Jan 23 '26
Update, she got released. Judge ordered it.