Judge Hands Trump Another Setback

Trump (R) and the “86 47” Controversy have been going on for Months. A Phrase that previously Landed former FBI Director James Comey (I) in Legal trouble, has now gotten Extended Permission to be Demonstrated on the Roads of Washington, D.C., as Requested by a Protest Group. Previously, the Trump Administration Argued that thePphrase can be Interpreted as a “Threat” to kill Trump.

U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss previously Ruled that the “86 47” Flags Displayed by Accountability NOW USA, were Protected Political Speech and did Not Constitute a Threat to Trump. The Ruling came in the FirstWweek of 6/2026, and the judge Granted a 14-day Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), allowing the Group to continue Displaying the Flag and Protesting near the National Mall. It also Prevented the National Park Service from Revoking the Group’s Permit over the “86 47” Flag.

The Federal Judge has Slightly “extended and expanded” the Accountability Now USA plaintiffs’ “Good Cause” Request. Moss has Granted a Two Week Extension of the TRO after Noting that the DOJ has “not filed a brief in opposition.” He also Ruled that the Variations of the “86 47” Flag, which were Not addressed inHhis Initial Order, are “not reasonably construed as calls for violence and, instead, merely advocate for Trump’s impeachment and removal from office.”

Moss, who is an Obama-Appointed Judge, said that the Group’s Newer Displays are Not “reasonably construed as calls for violence.” The New Displays include a Sign Reading “SIGN OUR DECLARATION OF SUPPORT” and “CONVICT. REMOVE.” Alongside a Raccoon Holding a Petition and Waving an “8647” Flag. Moss added, “Having reviewed these new displays and the context in which they are displayed, the Court concludes that, like the flag addressed in the Court’s prior opinion, these new displays are not reasonably construed as calls for violence and, instead, merely advocate for President Trump’s impeachment and removal from office.”

The Judge also said that the Context in which the Flags are Displayed plays a Critical Role in Determining the Message’s Meaning. He Noted that the Protest Group has Repeatedly Ddenied Advocating Violence, and there’s No Evidence that the Displays by the Group are Threatening to Trump. Moss added, “Indeed, if anything, they add further context that supports Plaintiff’s contention that the message at issue constitutes core political speech. As the Court has previously emphasized, context matters.”

Moss previously Cited Merriam-Webster’s Definition of “86” as “to throw out,” “to get rid of,” or “to refuse service to.” In some Instances, it is also Defined as “to kill”; however, this is Not the Actual Meaning due to the Phrase’s “relative recency and sparseness of use.” He further added that the Peaceful protest supports the assertion that the flag is not a threat, as per ABC News. Moss wrote, “In short, the record contains compelling evidence supporting Plaintiff’s Contention that it Ddisplayed the Flag merely to urge Trump’s Removal from Office but contains Nno Evidence Supporting Defendants’ Contention that the Flag Represented a True Threat on the Life or Physical Well-Being of the President of the United States.”










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker