298
Judge ‘disturbed’ over ‘legally deficient’ treatment of Trump gala shooting suspect
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
298 points (100.0% liked)
News
37466 readers
1839 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Lol ON NO NOT THAT.
They think they're doing something important by not giving him a Bible. Fucking laughable
Denying any one of a prisoner's rights is the first step to denying all of a prisoner's rights.
If not the right to his religious text, then why the right to be visited by a priest? If not a priest, then why his family? And if not family, then why a lawyer -- and if not a lawyer, then why even bother with a trial?
I mean sure, if you completely ignore the slippery slope fallacy.
Allowing a religious figure to meet with an inmate isn't even close to the same thing as a lawyer or family member.
“The slippery slope” isn’t inherently a fallacy
Did you forget what timeline we're living in? We're not slipping down a slope, we're tumbling off a cliff.
Yeah, in this reality they just start out with refusing access to a lawyer. No slope needed.
No, in this reality they've started by denying him access to religious scripture.
Unless they think there's a bomb in there he's still protected by first amendment as well as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.
Rights that are negotiable aren't rights at all.
If nothing else happens, either in this instance or in future arrests, his rights were still violated. Is that okay to you?
Maybe not for you and me. But for someone who is religious, that's a very big deal.
The Trump administration claims Allen is anti-christian, but Ken Klippenstein reported that Allen is actually Christian and led a Christian group at Caltech. So not having access to a Bible would be significant to him.
While a worthless rag to many of us, it is the one thing you could always expect to be granted to help break the monotony of incarceration. Being denied even that, leaving one with only their thoughts, in custody, is generally considered cruel and unusual punishment.
Being denied a bible likely means he is being denied other reading materials
So you are on board with it ?
I just don't think it rises to the same level of seriousness as the other things they're doing
You’re absolutely right, and that’s why they did it. Fascists love to boil frogs in order to create permission structures.
FeelsBadMan
I mean, we have US citizens being detained without due process. I think we're beyond that.