Regan Pifer reports that a Louisiana judge recently ruled that Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a movement, not an organization, and hence cannot be sued for their actions.
Why does this matter?
Essentially, in other words, this judge has issued a blank check for BLM activists to do whatever they darn well please.
If BLM is not an organization and only a movement, it cannot be sued. It is exempt. It is allowed to do whatever it darn well pleases.
According to Fox News:
In November 2016, an anonymous police officer in Baton Rouge sued DeRay Mckesson, a leading activist in the movement, and Black Lives Matter, laying blame for injuries he endured during a violent protest on July 9, 2016.
Like the Tea Party or the civil rights movement, U.S. District Judge Brian Jackson said Black Lives Matter is not an entity and therefore is unable to be sued.
“Although many entities have utilized the phrase ‘black lives matter’ in their titles or business designations, ‘Black Lives Matter’ itself is not an entity of any sort,” Jackson wrote in his ruling.
Judge Roberts also cleared Mckesson saying he “solely engaged in protected speech” at the protest.
The anonymous officer also tried adding “(hash)BlackLivesMatter” as a defendant in the suit, claiming it to be a “national unincorporated association” in California, but the judge ruled that a hashtag couldn’t be sued either.
Any charges filed associated with Black Lives Matter as an organization are not valid then.
Thus, Mckesson as leader of said organization cannot be affected either. Unless, of course, it can be proven that he alone inflicted injury upon said officer.
Mckesson describes himself as the “leader” of this movement and quit his job this summer as “the chief human capital officer of Baltimore Public Schools” in order to “devote more time to organizing” and increase the presence of his podcast.
Because nothing brings power to the people like a podcast…
Of course, this exemption doesn’t keep Mckesson and his fellow BLM activists from suing the city of Baton Rouge or law enforcement officers for attempting to break up their often rowdy and violent protests on behalf of the Black Lives Matter organization–or, excuse me, movement.
Law and order is desperately needed in this society. Stability is of utmost importance. Why are there loopholes to avoid accountability of action?
If a person says they are the head of a movement, does said movement need to be incorporated, file special paperwork, use a red pen, etc. etc. in order to be held accountable to the law?
At what point are we going to stop catering to those who continually break the law just to appear to be politically correct?
At what point do we need to think about the safety of children, families, and communities before a few loud-mouthed, angry vigilante activists who would rather throw tantrums than make any sort of real progress?
It is simply appalling that we continue to put the spotlight and microphone in front of these human beings. If this is such a horrific country, maybe they should move to a society where no law protects them.
Anyone? Am I alone in this?