• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hawaii judge who blocked Trump travel ban now receiving threats, FBI says

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
HONOLULU --The FBI says authorities are aware that the federal judge in Hawaii who ruled against President Donald Trump’s travel ban has received threatening messages.

FBI spokeswoman Michele Ernst said Thursday the agency is aware of reports of threatening messages against U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson and is prepared to help if necessary.

Unbelievable! I hope the FBI catches those who are making the death threats, and I hope that, whoever they are, they never see the light of day again.

Hawaii judge who blocked Trump travel ban now receiving threats, FBI says - CBS News

Several threats have been made against Watson in the wake of his March 15 ruling, Hawaii News Now reported. The U.S. Marshals Service has flown in about a dozen marshals to protect him around the clock, according to the news station.

Judge gets death threats after blocking Trump travel ban: report
 
Last edited:
I don't know if throwing somebody away is the best situation in this case. Free speech doesn't cover hate speech, and it's a politically charged climate. Emotions are running high, throw them in jail a few years, give them counseling, give them the opportunity to calm the **** down.

No need to destroy somebody's life over threats they couldn't have possibly thought they wouldn't be prosecuted for. Classic signs of mental illness and political activity making a bad combination.
 
Trump should pay the security costs.
 
I don't know if throwing somebody away is the best situation in this case. Free speech doesn't cover hate speech, and it's a politically charged climate. Emotions are running high, throw them in jail a few years, give them counseling, give them the opportunity to calm the **** down.

No need to destroy somebody's life over threats they couldn't have possibly thought they wouldn't be prosecuted for. Classic signs of mental illness and political activity making a bad combination.

You have a point. After all, Hinkley eventually got out.
 
I don't know if throwing somebody away is the best situation in this case. Free speech doesn't cover hate speech, and it's a politically charged climate. Emotions are running high, throw them in jail a few years, give them counseling, give them the opportunity to calm the **** down.

No need to destroy somebody's life over threats they couldn't have possibly thought they wouldn't be prosecuted for. Classic signs of mental illness and political activity making a bad combination.

If you make a death threat it doesn't mean you are mentally ill.
 
Reactionaries hate when they're stopped from marginalizing people different from them, so it's not surprising.

Free speech doesn't cover hate speech

Yes it does.

Death threats, on the other hand, are not covered.
 
If this is actually happening, then hopefully they will catch whoever is making those threats and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. If this is yet another faux hate crime...they should catch whoever made the accusations and prosecute them to the full extent of the law. Either way...
 
For those of you arguing about the First Amendment.. here's the Supreme Court case that defines the boundaries of free speech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action

So, you can say hateful things, as long as you don't instigate crime/assault/murder. It's called the direct incitement test, and it is the boundary of free speech. Thanks KKK.
 
For those of you arguing about the First Amendment.. here's the Supreme Court case that defines the boundaries of free speech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio



So, you can say hateful things, as long as you don't instigate crime/assault/murder. It's called the direct incitement test, and it is the boundary of free speech. Thanks KKK.

So then... it's not covered free speech if it in your hate speech you decide to tell someone you'll kill them.

Which is... what happened here.
 
If you make a death threat it doesn't mean you are mentally ill.

Oh, I think it is in the overwhelming majority of cases.

Reasonable people don't solve political problems by personally threatening to kill just 1 person. I can understand war being waged between two sides, but killing 1 person to get something accomplished hardly ever works out. Lincoln was killed, it didn't really help out the Confederacy. JFK, MLK and Malcolm X were all assassinated, not a single one of their deaths made a negative difference towards achieving the ultimate goal of civil rights for blacks. Harvey Milk was killed, gays today are very close to equal rights.

The only assassination of a single person that I can think of in the 20th century that actually set things back was that of Franz Ferdinand. Today, it simply doesn't make any sense to warm somebody with the words 'I'm going to kill you!' and hope that the death of that 1 person is going to achieve a larger political goal. There is a reason most political assassinations are done with little fanfare and people pretending to be somebody else.
 
Why should he?

Oh, I don't know. Maybe he shouldn't. It is Trump's Executive Order that caused the ruling that prompted the need for a U.S. Marshal guard. So, if Trump is the source of the cost, he should pay. And he's a great big billionaire who has "so much money it would make your head spin". And with him posing as a selfless public servant, it would be a nice headline grab. "Trump pays security cost for Federal judge who struck down Muslim ban."
 
This must be'fake news'. I've read and heard over and over only people on the left side of the political spectrum are violent and make threats. (sarcasm off)
 
Unbelievable! I hope the FBI catches those who are making the death threats, and I hope that, whoever they are, they never see the light of day again.

Hawaii judge who blocked Trump travel ban now receiving threats, FBI says - CBS News



Judge gets death threats after blocking Trump travel ban: report

Yes, not good.

I see it as the unfortunate result of the left's scorched earth policy of attacking and attempting to destroy anyone who doesn't toe their ideological line.

The gloves were taken off, and now the crazies feel they have carte blanche to return the favor.

Not a good plan to make death threats to government officials. Hopefully all the people doing it on all side will be held to account for their actions.
 
I hope they catch these assholes and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.

This is the **** Liberals do. We don't need these jerkoffs mucking up the rest of Conservatives.
 
I don't know if throwing somebody away is the best situation in this case. Free speech doesn't cover hate speech, and it's a politically charged climate. Emotions are running high, throw them in jail a few years, give them counseling, give them the opportunity to calm the **** down.

No need to destroy somebody's life over threats they couldn't have possibly thought they wouldn't be prosecuted for. Classic signs of mental illness and political activity making a bad combination.

Free speech doesn't exist if someone can be imprisoned for what they say. The only consideration should be whether a bona fide physical threat was made
 
Free speech doesn't exist if someone can be imprisoned for what they say. The only consideration should be whether a bona fide physical threat was made

... What... does that even mean? What would make it bona fide? Do you need to have your plan laid out with pictures, travel maps, etc? I think just saying it makes it bona fide in a country where you can get a gun... everywhere.
 
Oh, I don't know. Maybe he shouldn't. It is Trump's Executive Order that caused the ruling that prompted the need for a U.S. Marshal guard. So, if Trump is the source of the cost, he should pay. And he's a great big billionaire who has "so much money it would make your head spin". And with him posing as a selfless public servant, it would be a nice headline grab. "Trump pays security cost for Federal judge who struck down Muslim ban."

Should Obama pick up the tab on security for people who criticized him?
 
I don't know if throwing somebody away is the best situation in this case. Free speech doesn't cover hate speech, and it's a politically charged climate. Emotions are running high, throw them in jail a few years, give them counseling, give them the opportunity to calm the **** down.

No need to destroy somebody's life over threats they couldn't have possibly thought they wouldn't be prosecuted for. Classic signs of mental illness and political activity making a bad combination.

Many seem to think so but I will trust Eugene Volokh on this.
I keep hearing about a supposed “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment, or statements such as, “This isn’t free speech, it’s hate speech,” or “When does free speech stop and hate speech begin?” But there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment. Hateful ideas (whatever exactly that might mean) are just as protected under the First Amendment as other ideas. One is as free to condemn Islam — or Muslims, or Jews, or blacks, or whites, or illegal aliens, or native-born citizens — as one is to condemn capitalism or Socialism or Democrats or Republicans.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...o-the-first-amendment/?utm_term=.65eb70fc46c2
 
Unbelievable! I hope the FBI catches those who are making the death threats, and I hope that, whoever they are, they never see the light of day again.

Hawaii judge who blocked Trump travel ban now receiving threats, FBI says - CBS News



Judge gets death threats after blocking Trump travel ban: report

These must be those strict Constitutionalists...the ones who believe in the government system set up by the Constitution. Including that the Courts act as a checks and balances on the power of the other two branches.
 
He made a statement, not a threat

Apparently, some people interpreted his comments as open season on the judge(s). Now why do suppose they would do that?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom