A.G. Garland recently told Senators that he couldn’t charge protesters under the law unless they were arrested by U.S. Marshals,  and “the marshals on the scene didn’t think there was a reason to do that.” But he was telling a bit of a fib.

Washington Times:

Deputy U.S. marshals assigned to guard Supreme Court justices last year were directed to try not to make arrests, according to documents a U.S. senator revealed Tuesday, contradicting Attorney General Merrick Garland‘s assurances to Congress.

Sen. Katie Britt, Alabama Republican, confronted Mr. Garland with the training package used for the marshals deployed to protect justices. It said arrests were “not” to be a priority.

Conservatives have argued the protests, which erupted after a draft of a major abortion-rights ruling leaked last spring, violate a federal statute that outlaws protesting against a judge’s home with the intent of influencing a ruling.

Nobody was charged under that statute.

[.  . .]

One page of the guidance dealt specifically with the law governing pressuring of judges. It said the law could invite legal challenges, and discouraged the marshals from making arrests under that section.

A final page said any arrests needed to be coordinated with federal prosecutors first, which Ms. Britt said also contradicts Mr. Garland’s assertion that the marshals had a free hand.

“Any contemplated [marshals] enforcement action should be coordinated in advance with the appropriate USAO,” the guidance said, using the abbreviation for U.S. attorney’s office.

One page of the guidance dealt specifically with the law governing pressuring of judges. It said the law could invite legal challenges, and discouraged the marshals from making arrests under that section.

A final page said any arrests needed to be coordinated with federal prosecutors first, which Ms. Britt said also contradicts Mr. Garland’s assertion that the marshals had a free hand.

“Any contemplated [marshals] enforcement action should be coordinated in advance with the appropriate USAO,” the guidance said, using the abbreviation for U.S. attorney’s office.

I can only conclude that the Democrats were in favor of protesters intimidating the Justices and their families. Apparently baby killing is more important than the lives of our Supreme Court Justices. Since extreme leftists support population reduction, I suppose it shouldn’t be surprising. And death of officials who stand in their way is justifiable. Remember?

The lack of arrests has struck a nerve with conservatives who draw a contrast with the Justice Department’s zealous efforts in prosecuting pro-life demonstrators outside abortion clinics.