Occupy the Courts nationwide.

[lonestarnot]

Occupy the Courts will be a one day occupation of Federal courthouses across the country, including the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on Friday January 20, 2012.

Circle the Court - a day to encircle the Federal courthouse in Phoenix with thousands of people (hopefully) carrying signs concerning corporate personhood, rescinding Citizens United.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

1. wow. Does it get any dumber than this?

If you interfere with the legitimate operation of government you're asking for a serious crackdown. OWS will lose all legitmacy and may quickly find itself branded a criminal organization.

It's also stupid because 50% of the parties going to court have a good reason to be there and they deserve to have their cases heard.

[lonestarnot]

2. Corporate personhood, rescinding Citizens United.

Ya think. :eyes:

[Nuclear Unicorn]

4. You cannot shut down legit government functions no matter how important the issue is to you

If people shut down government offices everytime they had a beef with something the government did that upset them nothing would work.

Go ahead, tell the cons they can shut down the IRS, EPA, etc anytime they disagree.

If anyone goes through with this absurd stunt they face hard federal prison time. The 1st amendment will not protect you. You have the right to petittion the government, not interfere with it.

[Hangingon]

5. Yes

[coalition_unwilling]

7. Oh, come on. Your position is only valid insofar as you maintain that

this government retains legitimacy in the eyes of the people.

So is this government still legitimate in your eyes? Would you concede that it (including its judiciary) has lost legitimacy in the eyes of many?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. "Would you concede that it has lost legitimacy in the eyes of many?"

You mean people like Tim McVeigh and Randy Weaver? The various, so-called patriot militias?

You have two choices for changing government: voting or not. I choose voting.

[coalition_unwilling]

12. You did not answer either of my questions, so EPIC FAIL. You know

something? I really resent your use of McCarthy-esque tactics in comparing me to McVeigh.

So I'm putting you on Ignore. No need for you to respond.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

16. I answered. It may not have been the answer you imagined you wanted to hear

Sorry if the ridiculous stunt in the OP smacks too much of the anti-government militia types but it does. Sorry I had to be the one to point that out.

The fact is those courts are operating legitimately. Just because you don't like every decision does not delegitimize them. Yes, there are issues and bad decisions but EVERYBODY thinks that.

You know who Eric Rudolf is? He's a guy that disagreed with a court decision and personally took it upon himself to decided he was more legitmate than the court he disagreed with.

[lonestarnot]

23. 81818

[lunatica]

9. Who said the plan was to shut anything down?

The people on Wall Street weren't shut down and the OWS never tried to shut them down. There was talk of shutting it down for a day and that was the day there was a general march all over the city.

Occupy simply means having a large presence in order to bring attention to the corruption. When Wisconsin citizens stayed at the Capital Building in Madison they weren't trying to shut it down. They were trying to stop Scott Walkers legislation.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

13. So the idea behind the OP

is to have a presence only, not impede, disrupt or otherwise interfere with the operation of these courts?

So why the circling? One would think if visible presence were the only objective there would be no point in stationing people around back. Why not just congregate everyone out front where everyone entering or leaving can see the protesters?

[lonestarnot]

24. Never heard of informational pickets I guess. Hmmmmf.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

33. Who are you informing while standing behind the building? The guy taking out the cafeteria trash?

One would think an effective informational picket would have people standing in front of the building where public passers-by would see the signs. Encircling the courthouse would seem to be at odds with this declaration.

BTW - federal courthouses are rather large.

[lonestarnot]

38. So they are large. So. And who said anything about hiding behind anything? That is for cowards.

[lonestarnot]

42. There is no around back at any of our courts in my state.

[Malikshah]

43. operative word: Legit govt functions. When the highest court in the land is

as crooked as the day is long,

When the legislature is bought and paid for...

What is so "legit" about the govt functions????

Is this a call for anarchy?? No. Those who say as much are hyperbolic blowhards.

This is merely a call.. to have folks wake the f*&^ up.

[lonestarnot]

3. And a Friday.

[TreasonousBastard]

15. No, it doesn't, and they'll find out why when they find themselves in court.

[lonestarnot]

25. Work for a court?

[TreasonousBastard]

32. No, but I've had enough dealings with them.

[lonestarnot]

39. Bully for you then. Woohoo. Enough dealings with them, makes you the expert here then I guess.

Not.

[treestar]

6. Just stressing out people who are already stressed

Not every case in a federal courthouse is about corporate attorneys. There are going to be litigants from the 99% - in fact, mostly.

The bankruptcy court might be there, too. Ordinary people trying to do Chapter 7 or 13.

[lonestarnot]

26. Supreme Court with all conflicts of interests and refusals of recussal on a voluntary basis.

No problema. No justice no peace.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

8. 1. Courts are not political institutions

you can carry signs all you want but federal judges are not subject to election and that is for a reason. The democratic branches are the presidency and congress. To claim this is misplaced and futile would be an understatement.

2. CU has been decided by the Supreme Court. Lower federal courts cannot reverse that. They are powerless to provide the relief you seek. Congress is the only branch that can reverse CU.

[lunatica]

11. The Occupy movement does symbolic activism

When you Occupy one courthouse in the name of the people you are basically occupying the idea of the courts. It's symbolic.

And Occupy isn't a political institution either. It's actually an anti-political corruption movement. It's about corruption in government and the corporations.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. Symbolism is all well and good. Getting something useful accomplished is even better.

I do not want to wake-up on the first Wednesday in November next year and read --

"Hey! The GOP won the WH and both houses of congress in 2012!"

"Yes, but symbolically we put the screws to them by refusing to participate in what we consider to be a dysfunctional electoral process!"

[lonestarnot]

27. And actually getting something accomplished IS the goal.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

34. by picketing institutions that have no say while half your numbers stand in the back alley

ok

[lonestarnot]

40. What is it with you and the back alley?

[lonestarnot]

36. Are you kidding me not political! What bullshit!

[greytdemocrat]

14. Incredibly stupid idea.

This is a stunt and will be seen as such.

[lonestarnot]

28. IYO. And IMO not.

[TreasonousBastard]

17. In addition to the reasons already given...

you don't petition a court unless you have a brief. Courts are known to get pissed off when outsiders get into their business. Don't send judges letters about a case, don't demonstrate at the courthouse, and don't tell them they're wrong-- it never works.

Courts are not the enemy. Sure, they rule against our interests all the time, but they rule for us, too at least as often. They have often been the last resort when legislation hasn't worked. And occupiers might find themselves in front of those judges soon enough.

You wanna change the courts? Do the hard work and get a government that isn't afraid to appoint "liberal" judges.

This is a complete waste of time and resources on a fool's errand that has no chance of any positive outcome. It's showing desperation.

[coalition_unwilling]

19. I trust you are making your feelings known to your local Occupy

encampment? I think your viewpoint is really valuable and deserves a full airing there. I strongly encourage you to let your voice be heard.

[TreasonousBastard]

20. There is no local Occupy encampment around here. Someone tried...

to start one but nobody showed up.

In addition to being kinda stuck on doing things that have a chance of working, we had this important local election to deal with earlier in the month. And a few problems to solve.

[coalition_unwilling]

21. Had the raid not occurred at Occupy Los Angeles on Tuesday-Wednesday, I was

planning to start agitating at OLA for the formation of slates of electoral endorsements. Events in the past few days have precluded me from doing this in the short term and I'm almost certain my initial efforts will be 'hard blocked'. But I think it also safe to say that almost everyone at OLA believes in the principle of 'one man, one vote' and I am confident that, after debate and deliberation, we might have seen something close to your position emerge. We might still, as OLA held its first post-raid GA on the west steps of City Hall last night.

Alas, I'm still recuperating from a nasty case of the flu, so probably will not make it down again before the weekend.

Definitely appreciate your perspective, though.

[lonestarnot]

29. And to you, again, corporate personhood, rescinding Citizens United.

[TreasonousBastard]

31. So? That's one of many court decisions I don't like, but...

we can't change them by bothering judges. it just doesn't work.

Congress has, on rare occasions, tried to limit money in politics, but at least twice the Supreme Court shut them down on 1st Amendment reasoning. The only answer I see is to shift the Court, and that means the hard work of getting a less rightwing Senate.

When Scalia and Thomas are ready to go, we had better be ready to get good replacements.

[lonestarnot]

37. But we can certainly educate the public as to what judges have done. What you say can be done in

good time can take place now. That is by educating the public.

[philly_bob]

22. Encircle, protest: OK... "Occupy", block access, Not OK.

Sounds like they intend the former. Hope so...

[lonestarnot]

30. Yes. That is the intent. informational Corporate personhood, rescinding Citizens United as is my.

understanding thus far. Will post updates.

[nc4bo]

35. Occupy Fayetteville is scheduled to occupy.

Signs, mittens and voices.

[lonestarnot]

41. Yes! Occupy everything!

[WolverineDG]

44. The Marshalls are going to love this

not.

They take their jobs *VERY* seriously. They'll take you down if they think you pose the slightest security risk. I was at a bar luncheon recently where several of the federal judges were present. You'd have thought the President was in attendance, with all the security.

dg