Opinion: What the judge got so wrong about Maxine Waters
It’s nothing short of outrageous that Cahill told Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, after closing statements, that “Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned.”
Not even close.
Despite these sensible measures, Cahill appeared visibly angry over the fact that Waters came to Minnesota, traveled to areas where protestors have gathered, and did what politicians often do — urge people to stand up for what they believe in.
And if there is no guilty verdict? “We got to stay on the street. And we’ve got to get more get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business,” Waters said.
King-style nonviolent confrontation was the goal, meaning and strategy of the nationwide protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death under the knee of Derek Chauvin. It’s the spirit of the demonstrations Waters and others have attended.
It’s not everybody’s cup of tea, but it’s constitutionally protected speech — and it’s certainly not an attack on the integrity or functioning of the courts. But you’d never know that from Judge Cahill’s reaction.
“I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch and our function,” Cahill said. “I think if they want to give their opinions, they should do so in a respectful and in a manner that is consistent with their oath to the Constitution, to respect a coequal branch of government.”
Sorry judge, that’s not how it works. Polite, respectful demonstrators don’t get notice, don’t get heard and often don’t get results. Non-violent civil disobedience, on the other hand, has a venerable history of changing minds and transforming society.