Pisco

And I know a lot of commerce or conservatives have a lot of things to say about that specifically.

And whether or not it's gone too far and how much Congress has legislated in that domain.

So I understand that totally.

I think people would have less of a problem if it were just the force or threat part and the physical obstruction to the extent that it existed was ingress or egress only.

Like then it seems like, OK, maybe there's something there if it's a really important interest.

And you raise something, a nuance that is super, super important.

The conspiracy against rights part, which the administration is talking about incorporating.

The KKK Act has a criminal part of it.

And Trump was actually charged with this as part of the Jack Smith indictments.

If you he just went up to Congress as well.

That requires some sort of federal right in it.

And you can use the KKK Act, a conspiracy against rights, and incorporate underlying facts.

face act violation, or at least some courts have held that.

And so, yes, the face act being there, um, it's been sustained for its first amendment, uh, on facially, at least there could be a NASA applied challenge gives a lot of powers for the federal government to get involved and then hit you with that conspiracy against rights.

If they can show that there's like more than one person agreeing to do this stuff, which often you can.

Oh, boy.

Hard to say.

I think they're going to try to do the conspiracy against rights and incorporate an underlying face act violation.

I think if I were to judge the arguments just based on the evidence so far of what I've seen of the facts, I think they're going to have an easier time on the intent prong of it.

potentially the prong of physical obstruction.