Biden's DOJ Exposed: Garland 'Actively Sought To Dissuade' US Marshalls From Arresting Mob At Homes Of Supreme Court Justices

Republican senators are demanding answers from Biden's Department of Justice after they obtained "post orders" for the U.S. Marshalls tasked with protecting the homes of the Supreme Court justices after the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision was leaked in May 2022. The orders answer a fundamental question as to why pro-abortion activists, violating 18 U.S.C. §1507 by protesting at the justices' homes, were not arrested. It's simple, the Marshalls were "actively discouraged from doing so."

According to The Daily Signal, citing a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland from Senators Katie Britt (R-AL), Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Mike Lee (R-UT). Despite 18 U.S.C. §1507 forbidding protests in or near a residence occupied by a judge "with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty," the U.S. Marshalls were specifically advised that they were to avoid taking criminal enforcement actions against the protestors "unless absolutely necessary."

The letter further described that the U.S. Marshalls were to avoid "[m]aking arrests and initiating prosecutions," as this was "not the goal” of their deployment to the justices' homes.

The senators wrote,
 

"The training materials instruct the USMS deputies not to engage in protest-related enforcement actions “beyond that which are strictly and immediately necessary and tailored to ensure the physical safety of the Justices and their families” and further instruct the USMS deputies that Section 1507’s language regarding the “intent of influencing any judge” only “goes to criminal threats and intimidation, not 1st A[mendment] protected protest activities.”

The revelation of the DOJ training materials for the U.S. Marshalls directly contradicts testimony given by Garland during a heated hearing with Senator Ted Cruz and the Judiciary Committee in March.

The Daily Signal reported that Britt, in an emailed statement, told them, "The simple fact of the matter is that the Administration agreed with the protestors’ politics and willfully chose not to enforce the law."

The marshalls were allegedly told not to engage the protestors "unless they attempt to enter private property," according to the senators which tracks with information provided to The Daily Signal by U.S. Marshalls at Chief Justice John Roberts’ home in January.

Very troublingly, as The Daily Signal noted, Britt revealed in March that the marshalls were under orders that "[a]ny contemplated USMS enforcement action should be coordinated in advance" with the U.S. Attorney's office. These are not instructions given to officers instructed to work independently.

The senators brought light to this in their letter, writing,
 

"In response to Senator Cruz you confirmed that, to your knowledge, no prosecutions under Section 1507 had been brought, and you went on to say: “The Attorney General does not decide whether to arrest…the Marshals on scene…they do make the decision of whether to make an arrest.”

However, this new information shows quite the contrary that the USMS was given very specific instructions on how to proceed. During the hearing, Garland even doubled down in responding to Senator Mike Lee saying that he was "leaving it to the Marshals Service to make determinations on the ground," during the protests and that the Marshalls protecting the justices "have to make determinations about what they see on the ground."

The senators were more direct with Garland than a man accustomed to working with politicians might be used to. They concluded: 
 

"In light of all the clear evidence that DOJ actively sought to dissuade USMS personnel from enforcing Section 1507, the Deputy Attorney General’s April 19th testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the March 29th statement made by USMS Director Davis, and your continued failure to amend your March 1st testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee all raise a number of troubling questions regarding DOJ’s dishonesty and impropriety with respect to its handling of this matter."

In the highfalutin language of government, this means one thing quite clearly: 'You're full of it and we know it.'

You can follow Matt Holloway on Facebook, Twitter, TruthSocial, Gettr, Gab & Parler.