Amy Coney Barrett’s Neighbor Offers Blunt Advice for Protesters Outside Her Home

One neighbor of Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett offered blunt advice for pro-abortion activists who gathered to protest outside of the justice’s home on Wednesday.

Following the leaking of an opinion draft which indicated that the Supreme Court was poised to overturn abortion precedents, returning the issue to the states, radical pro-abortion activists have doxxed the addresses of conservative Supreme Court justices, and have gathered to protest outside of their homes.

On Wednesday, activists gathered outside Barrett’s home in Virginia dressed as characters from the fictional dystopian novel “The Handmaid’s Tale,” which the left often cites as the potential future without abortion.

According to reporting from the Daily Signal, only seven protesters actually showed up. They demonstrated outside Barrett’s residence for just ten minutes, the news outlet reported, before leaving the Falls Church, Virginia, neighborhood.

“It’s none of their business, why are they here?” said a neighbor who spoke to a reporter, noting that it was “inappropriate” to protest outside Barrett’s home.

“They have the right to protest but not in front of someone’s house. They live here — this is where she lives,” the neighbor added. “They shouldn’t be doing this.”

The man then offered some blunt advice for the protesters. “Go home and get a family,” he said.

https://twitter.com/DouglasKBlair/status/1524536276355104769

When the neighbor said it was “inappropriate” to protest outside of Barrett’s house, he was only partially correct. Despite the fact that freedom to protest is a fundamental American right enshrined in the First Amendment, protesting outside of the personal homes of judges is actually illegal.

Specifically, it violates federal law 18 U.S.C. §1507, which is part of a chapter on obstruction of justice. This law appears to describe exactly what these pro-abortion activists have been doing: attempting to influence a judge via protest.

The statute reads:

“Whoever, 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, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

Speaking with the Washington Post, First Amendment scholar Tabatha Abu El-Haj said that the statute appears applicable in this situation.

“The statute would seem to apply both because… they appear to be picketing and parading with the relevant intent and at the relevant locations, but also because the statute has a catchall, ‘resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence,’” Abu El-Haj said.