A panel of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. ruled that a pro-life groups lawsuit against D.C. for unevenly enforcing its laws against writing on sidewalks with chalk can go forward. The panel found that evidence showed BLM activists were allowed to write on sidewalks with chalk while the Pro-Life Demonstrators were not.
One of the Judges, Neomi Rao, writing in support of the opinion, stated, “The District permitted individuals expressing the ‘Black Lives Matter’ message to violate the defacement ordinance, as evidenced by the widespread painting, graffiti, and other defacement on public sidewalks, streets, and buildings, and on private property. By making no arrests, the police effectively exempted advocates of the ‘Black Lives Matter’ message from the requirements of the ordinance.”
Not the language used by the publication below. The title is just fine, but the article itself continuously refers to the group as being anti-abortion in a subliminal attempt to demonize opposition to abortion by classifying it as an anti rather than a pro (as they do for anti-life supporters, which they call pro-choice).
A three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. on Tuesday allowed a case to move forward that alleges the city violated the U.S. Constitution in the summer of 2020 when police arrested two anti-abortion activists for chalking pro-life messages on the sidewalk in front of a Planned Parenthood clinic. The anti-abortion activists allege that they were arrested while racial justice protesters who wrote “Black Lives Matter” on public spaces elsewhere faced no such consequences.
In the unanimous decision, the three judges — Trump appointee Neomi Rao, Obama appointee Robert Wilkins, and Biden appointee Michelle Childs — reversed a decision by a lower court to dismiss a lawsuit that was brought by pro-life protesters in late 2020.