AG Garland Dodges on Failure to Crack Down on Protests outside Justices’ Homes

During a Tuesday Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Attorney General Merrick Garland refused to take responsibility for the Department of Justice’s failure to prosecute protesters who regularly demonstrate outside the homes of conservative Supreme Court justices, arguing that the federal marshals on the ground have the discretion to arrest the protesters and have chosen not to.

In his first appearance before the 118th Congress, Garland was grilled by Republican senators about the DOJ’s failure to enforce a federal law that prohibits protests outside the homes of judges and jurors, who might be intimidated into changing their thinking on pending cases in response to such displays. Since the draft opinion in the Dobbs case, which ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade, was released, protests outside the justices’ suburban homes in Virginia and Maryland have intensified.

“You just said yes, it’s a crime to protest at the home of a judge. Same goes for jurors, by the way, with the intent of influencing a case. But in the wake of the leak of the Dobbs decision, when rioters descended on the homes of six Supreme Court justices, night after night after night, you did nothing,” Senator Ted Cruz (R., Texas) said to Garland. “The Department [of Justice] did nothing.”

Cruz repeatedly asked the attorney general whether a single prosecution has been brought against such protestors.

“Why are you unwilling to say no? You know it’s ‘no.’ I know it’s ‘no.’ Everyone in this hearing room knows it’s ‘no,'” said Cruz.  “You’re not willing to answer the question.”

“How do you decide which criminal statutes the DOJ enforces and which ones it doesn’t?” Cruz continued.

Garland responded that he was the first attorney general to offer the protection of United States marshals to the justices, but argued that arresting the protestors is up to the marshals, not him.

“The marshals on scene make that determination,” Garland explained.

Cruz countered: “The marshals do not make a determination over whether to prosecute. You, the attorney general, make a determination. You spent 20 years as a judge and you’re perfectly content with justices being afraid for their children’s lives.”

In response to the Dobbs draft, a leftist group called Ruth Sent Us posted what it claims are the home addresses of the Court’s six conservative justices in order to mobilize protestors. Democrats have defended these demonstrations so long as they are peaceful.

While an individual has been arrested for planning to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, there have been no prosecutions of protestors.

Several senators also asked Garland why many pro-life activists have been prosecuted during his tenure for allegedly blocking access to abortion clinics while those who have defaced pro-life pregnancy centers have largely escaped justice.

Garland explained to Senator Mike Lee (R., Utah) that most of the former cases occur in broad daylight and are photographed, while most of the latter occur at night by persons who are often never found. The FACE Act, signed by President Clinton in 1994, protects abortion clinics and pro-life pregnancy centers from those who would interfere with their daily business.

But Garland’s explanations for the prosecution and treatment of Mark Houck, a pro-life activist, drew the ire of Senator Josh Hawley.

The case involves Houck shoving a 72-year-old patient escort for Planned Parenthood twice. Houck claims the man invaded his 12-year-old son’s personal space and yelled at him.

The Philadelphia district attorney declined to prosecute the case, but the DOJ did, charging Houck with two FACE Act violations. Hawley expressed outrage about the fact Houck had offered to turn himself in, but was instead subjected to an arrest in front of his children by tens of FBI agents carrying long guns.

“You use an unbelievable show of force with guns — that I just note liberals usually decry. We’re supposed to hate long guns and assault-style weapons. You’re happy to deploy them against Catholics and innocent children,” Hawley explained.

“And then you haul him into court and the jury acquits him in one hour,” Hawley continued, calling the Justice Department’s behavior “disgraceful.”

Houck was found not guilty last month.

“What’s really interesting to me is this seems to directly contradict your own memorandum about the use of force at the Justice Department. You say officers may use only the force that is objectively reasonable,” Hawley said.

Garland strongly disagreed with Hawley’s characterization that he was abdicating responsibility and argued that the FBI disagreed with Hawley’s characterization of Houck’s treatment.

However, the attorney general once again deferred to law enforcement officers on arrests.

“Determinations of how to make arrests under arrest warrants are made by the tactical operators in the district,” said Garland. “All I know is what the FBI has said…they made decisions on the ground of what was safest and easiest.”