DC Police, Prosecutors, and Politicians Allow Their Leftwing Allies to Attack Pro-Life Protesters In the Street Without Consequences

This isn't a government, it's merely the meeting hall for a violent, primitive tribe.

Police say they are still investigating a violent assault on pro-life activists that took place outside a D.C. Planned Parenthood clinic in late July. But a closer look at the manner in which D.C. authorities handle attacks on pro-lifers raises questions about the lack of consequences for the attackers--and how safe it is for those engaged in pro-life work in the nation's capital.

The most recent incident involved an attack on pro-life activists Terrisa Bukovinac and Mike Gribbin outside the Planned Parenthood Carol Whitehill Moses Center on 4th Street Northeast. Both Bukovinac and Gribbin have been advocating for the unborn in D.C. for several years, though they are affiliated with different pro-life organizations.

According to a Metropolitan Police Department incident report obtained by The Daily Signal, two individuals approached the activists on July 22 outside the abortion clinic. A verbal altercation ensued, the report says. Then, one of the assailants assaulted Gribbin by "slamming" him to the ground and punching him several times.

That same Planned Parenthood clinic, about a 10-minute drive from Capitol Hill, has come under scrutiny before. The Daily Signal reported in January 2022 that a female patient was rushed from the abortion clinic to the emergency room in an ambulance, clearly in pain and struggling to walk.

...

Video footage of the incident shows an unidentified man grappling with Gribbin before slamming Gribbin to the ground. He then continues to beat Gribbin in the back and head as the pro-life activist attempts to rise. Bukovinac can be seen filming the incident and yelling at the assailant to stop. (A third pro-life activist appears to be filming the entire scene.)

The video shows Bukovinac recording the fight and the female assailant trying to slap Bukovinac's phone out of her hand. Then, the woman swings at Bukovinac and pushes her on the sidewalk toward the street.

Meanwhile, the male assailant repeatedly yells "stay down" at Gribbin as the pro-life activist struggles to stand up and fight back. The male assailant then turns to an unknown person filming the entire incident and attempts to also strike that person.

...

Police told The Daily Signal that they are investigating the incident and cannot comment on whether they have identified the attackers.

This is not the first time that pro-life activists have faced violent treatment for advocating for the unborn. In 2019, Gribbin was assaulted, allegedly by former Google employee Quinn Chasan, while Gribbin was chalking pro-life messages on the sidewalk near the same D.C. Planned Parenthood clinic.

Though D.C. police said in 2019 that the case remained under investigation, the MPD told the Daily Caller News Foundation in 2020 that the "United States Attorney's Office declined to prosecute in this case."

Gribbin sued Chasan--and Chasan filed a countersuit in 2020.

Earlier this month, the Metropolitan Police Department told The Daily Signal that the case was closed. "MPD applied for an arrest warrant, and the warrant was denied," spokeswoman Kristina Saunders said.

The U.S. Attorney's Office did not respond to requests for comment from The Daily Signal as to why it declined to prosecute the case.

Jonathan Turley wrote about the DC Circuit Court's ruling that DC has engaged in selective prosecution of its laws, only against people the blue tribespeople hate and wish to harm.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has handed down a major victory for free speech against the District of Columbia. In Frederick Douglass Foundation v. District of Columbia, Judge Neomi Rao reversed district court judge James E. Boasberg who dismissed the challenge by pro-life protesters who alleged that they were treated differently from Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters. The selective enforcement of city ordinances gave what Judge Rao called "a monopoly in expressing its views . . . the antithesis of constitutional guarantees." The contrast in these cases was raised by a few commentators and sites in prior years. In the summer of 2020, the city allowed thousands of Black Lives Matter protesters to take over streets in D.C. without any permit. The police watched as protesters wrote slogans and slurs on stores, streets, and sidewalks with paint and chalk. No one was arrested.

However, later two pro-life advocates in a protest in front of a D.C. Planned Parenthood facility were immediately arrested when they chalked "Black Pre-Born Lives Matter" on a public sidewalk.

Chief Judge Boasberg previously held that they had no right to challenge the selective enforcement of the laws. They simply had to plead guilty and accept that their views were not given the same official tolerance.

Judge Rao reversed the trial court and said this is precisely what the First Amendment is meant to prevent. The D.C. Circuit noted that such selective prosecution cases are based on one of the hardest claims to prove: "Selective enforcement claims must clear a high hurdle. Because the lawful exercise of prosecutorial discretion does not violate the Constitution, disparate enforcement of a neutral ordinance based on viewpoint is unlawful only when the prosecutorial factors are similar, and 'unlawful favoritism' remains the predominant explanation for the government's targets."

While reaffirming the ruling under the Equal Protection Clause, the court reversed on free speech grounds:

The First Amendment prohibits government discrimination on the basis of viewpoint. "To permit one side ... to have a monopoly in expressing its views ... is the antithesis of constitutional guarantees." City of Madison Joint Sch. Dist. No. 8 v. Wis. Emp. Relations Comm'n, 429 U.S. 167, 175--76 (1976). The protection for freedom of speech applies not only to legislation, but also to enforcement of the laws. This case concerns a constitutional challenge to the selective enforcement of the District of Columbia's defacement ordinance against some viewpoints but not others.

...

The First Amendment prohibits the government from favoring some speakers over others. Access to public fora must be open to everyone and to every message on the same terms. The District may act to prevent the defacement of public property, but it cannot open up its streets and sidewalks to some viewpoints and not others. During the summer of 2020, the District arrested individuals chalking "Black Pre-Born Lives Matter" on the sidewalk, while making no arrests against the many individuals marking "Black Lives Matter" on sidewalks, streets, and other property."

DC Republicans had better wake up and actually do something about this -- including mandating that jurisdictions with histories of partisan justice must remove trials to courtrooms outside the blue tribe-lands -- or I'm done with them.

I will not support a party that condones physical attacks on me by the blue savages. And we cannot be forced to leave our homes to answer a summoning by the government located in blue cities, where the police forces will refuse to protect us against the savages living there.

It's time to move government offices out of the cities. A government cannot demand citizens come to lawless hellholes to transact vital business.

posted by Ace at 03:41 PM

| Access Comments