What’s Wrong with the World

The men signed of the cross of Christ go gaily in the dark.

About

What’s Wrong with the World is dedicated to the defense of what remains of Christendom, the civilization made by the men of the Cross of Christ. Athwart two hostile Powers we stand: the Jihad and Liberalism...read more

Acts 17 federal lawsuit filed against Dearborn

After much waiting, I am pleased to announce that Thomas More Law Center has finally filed a federal lawsuit against those who abused the Dearborn Four last summer. I haven't had a chance to read the brief, but I strongly suspect that it is related to the brief Thomas More recently filed appealing Negeen Mayel's conviction for "failure to obey a police officer." (See my post on that here.)

Best of luck to Acts 17 ministries and Thomas More Law Center in showing the police and the Muslims of Dearborn that they are not above the law. I hope that this will mean that nothing similar happens this next summer and that missionaries are able to speak freely about the Gospel at the Dearborn Arab festival.

Comments (3)

I truly hope that one of the penalties they are seeking is that the police department undertake a training program in "sensitivity" to Christian ideas. Oh, and the fact that even Muslims have to obey the law, whether they like it or not.

I imagine they're seeking monetary damages. I'll be pleased if they just teach them that they can't do it again. I have to admit though that I don't know what's going to happen in Dearborn regardless of how the court case goes. There's an incredible chutzpah there. That chutzpah, too, is a kind of melding of the pro-Muslim bias with an unfortunate bullying culture that afflicts some policemen and police departments. When I was researching the "failure to obey a policeman's orders" laws, I came across message boards on which policemen _expressly_ told inquirers that whatever the ultimate legal decision as to how far those laws were meant to go, the inquirers had better obey police orders on the spot with no questions asked or they would be put through it. The process is the punishment, and all that. I'm not saying they were threatening brutality, just that they were in essence saying that it _didn't matter_ whether such laws have an implicit "reasonable" qualifier or limitations based on the Fourth Amendment--they would use them in whatever way they wanted, because no one wants to be dragged through jail and court. With that attitude floating around, the police in Dearborn may just keep on doing whatever they want.

I'm not saying they were threatening brutality, just that they were in essence saying that it _didn't matter_ whether such laws have an implicit "reasonable" qualifier or limitations based on the Fourth Amendment--they would use them in whatever way they wanted, because no one wants to be dragged through jail and court.

In other words, "we are the law."

This is why I am so adamant that the monopoly on arrest and prosecution needs to be broken.

The only way to make these people understand that they are not above the law is the certain knowledge that if they break the law, the citizen can act confidently--and forcefully--against them like any other law-breaker.

Post a comment


Bold Italic Underline Quote

Note: In order to limit duplicate comments, please submit a comment only once. A comment may take a few minutes to appear beneath the article.

Although this site does not actively hold comments for moderation, some comments are automatically held by the blog system. For best results, limit the number of links (including links in your signature line to your own website) to under 3 per comment as all comments with a large number of links will be automatically held. If your comment is held for any reason, please be patient and an author or administrator will approve it. Do not resubmit the same comment as subsequent submissions of the same comment will be held as well.