Score another win for uncivil society and lawlessness.
A Supreme Judicial Court justice appointed by Gov. Charlie Baker ruled that Judge Richard Sinnott III was not allowed to force prosecutors to pursue a disorderly conduct case against a Straight Pride Parade protester, handing Suffolk District Attorney Rachael Rollins a huge victory.
Massachusetts is becoming more of an embarrassment every day — whether it’s Rollins giving criminals a free pass onto the streets or crooked city officials accepting bribes or judges slipping illegal-immigrant criminals out through back doors.
We’re now just a much bigger and more dysfunctional Rhode Island, poised to anoint yet another Kennedy to higher office based on last name alone.
It should come as no surprise to those who’ve been following Massachusetts politics lately.
And the Supreme Judicial Court is not immune to the lurch to the left we’re seeing in politics today.
Sinnott had become a hero to cops after he held a hard line against the Straight Pride protesters, refusing Rollins’ request to drop charges against them for their role in what turned into a fracas Aug. 31 on City Hall Plaza.
But SJC Justice Frank Gaziano — thanks Charlie — ruled that Sinnott’s attempt to maintain the charges against Roderick Webber over the objections of Rollins, violated the “separation of powers” clause in the state constitution. Police say Webber was using a megaphone to incite the crowd. He was charged with disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.
Rollins wanted to free Webber without any charges, and now she’s gotten her wish.
Along the way, the ever classy Rollins took a cheap shot at Sinnott as she reveled in the SJC decision.
“This was a colossal waste of time, quite frankly, because anyone who’s gone to law school knows that … there is a separation of powers,” she said.
And anyone who’s spent time in Massachusetts knows that liberal judges — in this case a former prosecutor, too — will always side with liberal prosecutors.
“What I’m most proud of … is there’s clarity now,” Rollins added. “We thought we had it, but now it’s crystal clear that we have the authority to do what it is we did.”
And what is it that you did, exactly, District Attorney?
You sent a message out there that you’ll do anything you can to give a break to people who want to stifle the speech of others. What a great message — on top of your disregard for a wide range of public nuisance, theft and drug offenses — to send the people who consider it their right to do all those things.
(c)2019 the Boston Herald
Visit the Boston Herald at www.bostonherald.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.