SCOTUS seems to think people are too 'hypersensitive' and it's not the stalker's problem but the stalkee, who should lighten up a bit

[butters]

Gorsuch, Barrett, Thomas, Roberts yukked it up, finding it both funny that some of the THOUSANDS of unsolicited texts sent to a woman from a man with a history of violence might be seen as threatening AND a great moment to decry the sensibilities of people nowadays. Which nicely covers some of the things THEY'VE been accused of doing and saying. Barrett's hypothetical managed to be both ignorant AND offensively racist; if you can't see how it's racist, you need better glasses:

What if a college professor gives a lecture “about just how vicious it was to be in a Jim Crow south and puts up behind them on a screen a picture of a burning cross and reads aloud some threats of lynching that were made at the time” and “Black students sitting in the classroom” interpret the lecture as a physical threat “because they don’t understand it”?

if one of them received such a barrage of messages, some not looking too threatening at face value but without context as a whole onslaught of obsession, they'd be screaming from the rooftops about additional protection for themselves.

The reasonableness of that fear was vividly illustrated by the Supreme Court oral arguments in Counterman v. Colorado on Wednesday morning, as members of the highest court of the land joked about messages sent by a stalker to his victim, bemoaned the increasing “hypersensitivity” of society, and brushed aside consideration of the actual harm of stalking to focus on the potential harm of stalking laws.

For nearly two years, Billy Raymond Counterman sent thousands of unsolicited and unwanted Facebook direct messages to C.W., a local musician, ultimately driving her to abandon her career and leave the state. Counterman, who had previously served time in federal prison for making violent threats against his ex-wife and her family, argues that his conduct towards C.W. was free speech protected by the First Amendment.

The justices’ message was clear: Stalking is not the problem; sensitivity is. To them, stalking is quite literally a state of mind: If the stalker didn’t mean for his conduct to be frightening, then it isn’t. All the target has to do is understand that; she just needs to lighten up, take a joke, accept the compliment, grasp the lesson. Just because someone has made objectively terrifying statements is no reason to overreact and get law enforcement involved; victims should wait for the stalker to do something really frightening before they jump to conclusions.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opin...&cvid=f4128cc1adb04da18dba2217d3f46d77&ei=232

 

[Lazaran]

Every “conservative” “justice” on the Supreme Court should be impeached and imprisoned for the damage they have caused the nation.

From “Citizens United” to the overturning of Roe, etc, and this current example, they have irreparably harmed democracy.

Shame on them.

SAD!!!