Do you agree with the Federal Appeals Court’s decision on the selective enforcement favoring certain protests?

Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.

The federal appeals court recently made a unanimous ruling against the selective enforcement favoring left-wing protestors. This decision came about after pro-life students and the Frederick Douglass Foundation were arrested for writing "Black Preborn Lives Matter" in chalk on a sidewalk. In contrast, during the summer of 2020, Black Lives Matter (BLM) protestors were not interfered with when their actions led to destruction of public spaces and businesses. Judge Neomi Rao pointed out this disparity, stating that the government cannot favor some messages while prohibiting others. The ruling was 3-0, with judges appointed by Trump, Obama, and Biden all in agreement.

Do you agree with the Federal Appeals Court's decision on the selective enforcement favoring certain protests?

Yes, I agree. The enforcement should be equal and fair regardless of the message or group.
No, I disagree. There are instances where selective enforcement may be necessary.

A federal appeals court unanimously ruled that the government cannot use “selective enforcement” to favor left-wing protestors, according to the Washington Stand.