white supremacy codified in precedent. faaaaaaantaastic.

fucking conservatives assholes.

There seems to be little doubt that Defendants, or at least some members of RAM, engaged in criminal violence. But they cannot be selected for prosecution because of their repugnant speech and beliefs over those who committed the same violence with the goal of disrupting political events

That's actually part of the judge's decision. "These people are guilty, but since you didn't prosecute those other people, too bad."

Huh. This same George Bush appointed judge was forced to step down as chief judge of the district after making racist dog whistle remarks during a public zoom meeting about the first Black woman appointed to be the Central District’s executive and clerk of court.

I wonder if there's some sort of link between being racist and pandering to far right terrorists...

So the charges, crimes, evidence, and jury don't matter. It's all cleared because bOtH sIdEs nonsense. Hey judge I have an idea, if other people commit crimes then prosecute them. I wonder if he's close to realizing why you don't see much on the 'other side' (the why is that there is no violent far left committing crimes. Or if you want to be pedantic, it's incredibly, vastly minuscule compared to the violent far right.)

I'm starting to understand better and better how countries fall into strongmen and fascism. It's unreal.

“Prosecuting only members of the far right and ignoring members of the far left leads to the troubling conclusion that the government believes it is permissible to physically assault and injure Trump supporters to silence speech,” Carney wrote in his order.

Did he just say the far right and Trump supporters are one and the same? Lolol.

Rundo was accused not just of organizing the violent confrontations, but also of attacking protesters and police officers. After Rundo was ordered by police to stop attacking a “defenseless person” during the Berkeley protest, he allegedly punched an officer twice in the head, according to an arrest warrant.

I have a feeling if someone with "far left" beliefs showed up in his courtroom with the same charges, he wouldn't hesitate to throw the book at them. This decision seems ripe for overturning on appeal, since he literally says in his decision "there's no doubt they committed these violent acts."

US District Judge and White Supremacist Cormac J Carney

Of course there is a bias against neo-nazi fascists in this country. See, there’s this little thing called World War II that we all learned about in school where millions died and the world joined forces to put a stop to nazis. So I suspect a vast majority of adults these days think nazis are scum of the earth. And rightfully so.

"There's a bias against folks who want to do race based violence, and I just can't have that in America."

Whatabout is now a criminal defense, if you are a white supremacist.

There's more about this asshole judge's college football career than his legal career in his Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cormac_J._Carney

Yea, there is. We called it WW2.

Don't start shit and there won't be shit. That part is unbiased.

So by dismissing the case, the judge here is allowing people to get away with punching officers in the face (only if you're right wing).

How does this align in any way with their Blue Lives Matter aligned ideology?

bias against the far right

They say that like it's a bad thing, I'm all for a bias against fascism

Remember when the Right used to scream about Judicial Activism?

Commenting again because I don't want anyone looking at the modlog to draw an absolutely wrong conclusion (for apparently a second time): It looks like distinguishing between discussing the possibility that violence, vigilante and otherwise, might be the result of these kinds of decisions, and advocating the same--which neither I nor, best I can tell, anyone else here has done--is a level of nuance that may be too much to ask. So be it, but accusing me of advocating violence in a public forum is an accusation to which I'm afraid I must vehemently and publicly respond and deny.

"When people can no longer rely on the courts to adjudicate crime, they will adjudicate it themselves. The next agent who catches up with this nazi might decide it's not worth the trouble to bring him back alive." To be quite clear: I think this is a bad thing, because I'm an officer of the courts of this country, and vigilantism should be avoided at all costs just because guillotines don't have good judgment, if for no other reason. But it may be a result all the same, and hushing those who whisper of its spectre, even with the best of intentions, will not prevent it.

Remove this one as well, and let of it a record be. [And mods, if you don't want the modlog discussed, add that to the rules.]

"Would somebody please think of the white supremacists!" /s

Fuck this judge.

Yes reality is very biased against White Supremacists and their political cronies.

Why isn't that judge ?

The Good - White-supremacist who had to be chased to Romania after fleeing, will go back in jail (if caught), after an emergency appeal from the state

The Bad - A District Judge released an all-but-convicted violent Nazi, citing checks notes “both sides”, and SET NO CONDITIONS FOR THAT RELEASE, despite the prosecution’s protests and his proven track record of running from the law:

“Due to the district court’s order, Rundo will be released imminently, at which point he will be under no bond conditions or travel restraints,” according to the motion by Assistant U.S. Attorney Bram Alden, who is chief of the Los Angeles office’s Criminal Appeals Section.

Basically admitting to being a Nazi fuck.