In relation to this, thinking about a new community for Political Activism. Calls to action, that kind of thing.
The rules would be super simple:
-
Purpose is for protest organizing. [Country, City, State]
-
Absolutely no calls for violent action.
-
No links to fundraisers. Too rife for fraud and abuse. Stories about fundraisers would be fine, but no GoFundMes, etc.
Think there’s room for PolticalActivism?
That’s not how it works. Courts don’t determine what is illegal, they determine through evidence whether or not someone has done something that is illegal.
Which was done, and yes, what they did was illegal. And then they defied the courts. Which is illegal.
Are you stupid?
You’re misrepresenting how the legal process works. Courts can determine guilt or order compliance, but enforcement and due process are what make a ruling effective. Simply asserting “it’s illegal” on social media doesn’t make it so in practice — it’s still a legal process, not a declaration of opinion. Name-calling doesn’t strengthen your point. If you want to explain how a court ruling has been legally enforced or adjudicated, go ahead — otherwise this is just rhetoric.
Btw you failed to adequately respond to my previous comment, so here, you may try again:
Are you stupid?
But we aren’t simply asserting that it’s illegal. There was a court case. It was ruled on. It was defied by the president. It is illegal to defy a court order.
It’s that simple. Do you need me to quote legal codes at you?
Again. Are you stupid? Rage bait? Probably rage bait.
You’re way oversimplifying the situation. Yes, courts can issue rulings, and failing to comply with a court order can lead to contempt or other enforcement measures. But whether an action constitutes an enforceable violation isn’t automatic — it depends on the specific ruling, the scope of the order, and whether formal enforcement or contempt proceedings have been carried out. Simply saying someone ‘defied the court’ doesn’t make it legally finalized or proven beyond process. If a court formally finds contempt or imposes sanctions, that’s the legally enforceable part. Until then, it’s a matter under investigation or adjudication, not a settled legal fact. Also, name-calling doesn’t make the legal argument stronger — it just obscures the issue. Let’s stick to the actual legal process if we want a meaningful discussion.”