Attorney General Merrick Garland was questioned during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing about the fact that U.S. Marshals guarding the homes of Supreme Court justices have been instructed not to arrest protesters even though Garland previously claimed that the marshals have a free hand when it comes to making arrests.
Senator Britt came with proof that the marshals are instructed in the training package that arrests of protesters outside of the homes of Supreme Court justices are not priorities.
Garland claims he had no idea that guidance in the training material instructs the marshals not to make arrests outside the homes of the justices.
It's not that the marshals don't think it is necessary to make arrests, it's that the marshals are specifically instructed not to make arrests.
Mr. Garland told senators earlier this month that his prosecutors couldn't bring cases unless the marshals made arrests, and the marshals on the scene didn't think there was a reason to do that.
Why aren't liberals speaking out about this? Why did it take a freshman senator to bring evidence to Garland's attention that he is either under a false assumption that the marshals see no need to make arrests or Garland is lying about instructions to the marshals? Either way, it's unacceptable.
Senator Britt told Garland that it is clear the marshals were given other instructions.
No comments:
Post a Comment