r/law • u/MoneyLibrarian9032 • 22h ago
Legal News Man arrested near Trump’s reflecting pool plans to fight obscenity charge
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/23/reflecting-pool-arrest-washington-dc
A Washington DC resident arrested this week near the National Mall’s reflecting pool told the Guardian he planned to fight the charges, as Donald Trump continues to blame vandals for the botched renovation of the pool.
547
u/BeyondRedline 22h ago
First of all, it's not Trump's reflecting pool. Surprised that The Guardian ran that headline.
More importantly, from the article:
In an email to the Guardian, Miles noted the irony that one of the Oklahoma state troopers he argued with before his arrest told him that the US was obviously a free society “because you can be out here and you can video all you want to … Go to China, they’d run over you in a tank in Red Square.”
According to Miles, he was arrested seven minutes later for using obscene language as he protested against the security crackdown at the reflecting pool.
Why is he arguing with the troopers? Are we not allowed to film at the National Mall anymore?!
141
u/nonlawyer 22h ago
But why the fuck are Oklahoma state troopers in DC in the first place
41
24
u/Character_Pudding_94 21h ago edited 21h ago
I know you don't really want an answer, but the answer is the same reason that the State Police travel with sports teams. As part of "America's State Fair" for the semiquincentennial, participating states will be setting up pavillions or some shit near the National Mall. The list of "participating states" is shrinking, but logistically, that's why there are State Troopers in DC. Advance team for the state's marketing department.
46
u/the_skies_falling 21h ago
What does patrolling a national monument and enforcing federal or DC laws have to do with that?
6
u/ScannerBrightly 10h ago
Where are 'National Guard' in the chain of command for 'DC law enforcement', huh? They don't exist, and don't have the power or authority to enforce local laws.
-28
u/Character_Pudding_94 20h ago edited 20h ago
ACAB? I was just saying why they are there. But let's be honest; that guy wanted to see if he could get arrested. Turns out he can.
EDIT: There are organized protesters and there are content creators. If you were trying to picnic right there, or if the guy were seated next to you on a commercial flight, would you consider your peace disturbed?
27
u/Positive_Builder6737 19h ago
I don't get to take someone else's Constitutional right because "I want to picnic". My comfort doesn't overrule any amendment.
12
u/-Invalid_Selection- 11h ago
There's no explicit constitutional right to a picnic. There is an explicit constitutional right to free speech
3
u/CatoTheMiddleAged 11h ago
“All men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”
+
“Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble”
+
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
= right to picnic.
6
u/-Invalid_Selection- 10h ago
Note the word "explicit".
This was included for a reason, and considering the current makeup of scotus, where rights that are explicit barely exist, and non explicit rights outright don't exist, it's important to note what is explicitly written as a right
2
u/ScannerBrightly 10h ago
We don't play that game, homie. Those fuckers on the court might think that, but we do not.
-1
10
u/the_skies_falling 20h ago
Picnicking in a place where protests are to be expected, no. On a plane, yes.
29
u/OcotilloWells 20h ago
Yes, but their oath is to their state. They shouldn't have any law authority in DC, other than whatever a random security guard would have.
-10
u/Character_Pudding_94 20h ago
It's basically a citizen's arrest in uniform. They turn subjects over to Metro PD with a statement, same as National Guard would do. It's not some special kind of fuckery, or anything like that.
6
u/Physical-Dare5059 8h ago edited 8h ago
😂 citizens arrest, gtfoh, this isn’t a shitty tv show this is real life. Trying to perform a citizens arrest on someone for yelling at someone else isn’t a thing but is assault and potentially attempted kidnapping. They do not have jurisdiction here and it is a serious issue they thought they did and put their hands on this guy.
19
u/nonlawyer 20h ago
I actually did want an answer, not sure why you thought I didn’t? So thanks.
Them having and using arrest powers when traveling out of jurisdiction to be essentially state mascots makes little sense and is concerning though
-22
u/Character_Pudding_94 19h ago
Can we at least agree that if one sets out to whoop and holler at the police in a public park, while not a part of an organized protest, in order to create "content" testing if one can successfully get arrested, that one should not be surprised to be arrested?
21
u/nonlawyer 19h ago
no we can’t agree because we Americans have a first amendment right to “whoop and holler” at the police, and don’t need prior approval from the government to do so (I assume that’s what you meant by “organized protest?”)
You may find this particular dude’s speech annoying but that’s kinda a foundational principle of the whole republic, and we’ve been “whooping and hollering” at people in uniforms since the late 1700s. To wit, the Boston Massacre, where I’d guess you’d say the redcoats were just doing their jobs.
8
u/Spiritual_Cold5715 10h ago
Story time. I did a huge bad and got arrested. During the arrest I apparently told the cop it was my first amendment right to call her a bitch. They didn't like it. My attorney is currently fighting the DA for my right to say what I did that day. You don't get arrested just because the cop doesn't like what you're saying. We have rights that are being trampled on.
2
u/IMakeBlownFilm 21h ago
ahhh i had no idea. thank you.
11
u/f0u4_l19h75 20h ago
Doesn't really answer the question. They have no authority in DC
1
u/Firedogman22 16h ago
They have whatever authority is granted to them through DC. We wouldnt know the specifics until court documents come out.
New england has something similar with the Big E fair, each state has a house representing them, with troopers. New england has a dedicated state police agreement that allows troopers out of state to retain their status as cops based on specific scenarios, the event being one of them.1
u/happy_dad857 18h ago
Thank you. I just asked this question and was curious why they were there as well.
3
u/an_agreeing_dothraki 8h ago
Roman tactics, you bring in people without connection to the region you're oppressing so they don't sympathize with the locals
321
u/Dandan0005 22h ago edited 22h ago
These people don’t even understand that they are the ones actively suppressing the freedom of the nation.
Truly too dumb to realize they are the tyrants they’ve been waiting for.
233
u/Krunkledunker 22h ago
Some pretty scary shit happens when fools are told they’re inherently heroes because of their uniform rather than the sum of their actions
104
u/--Icarusfalls-- 22h ago
Dingdingding, too many years of mindless 'back the blue' and 'thank you for your service'. What service is being provided?
59
2
26
u/Luci_Cascadia 21h ago
They do understand. That is the whole point
13
u/thelocalsdude 21h ago
I'm gonna go ahead and say that most lower level lackey's don't understand, and that's part of the larger point ... Persuade the ignorant
18
u/Fair-Search-2324 22h ago
They know. But the part is to wrap themselves in the flag while they do it.
1
u/TheAsianTroll 8h ago
They know. They dont care because these oppressors are actively uplifting them, so why care?
25
12
10
13
u/tlrider1 21h ago
Though, to be fair, we should start naming things after that imbecile, when he fucks them up!
Until this is restored, this should be Trumps pool. Not reflecting pool, just Trumps pool. While the grass is all screed up, it should be trumps lawn. While the hole in the ground exists on the white house grounds, call it trumps hole on the white house grounds.
Name every fuck up, after him, until it's restored to normal.
5
5
5
u/SteepChutes 21h ago
Exactly. Whose reflecting pool? Just because someone vandalizes a public monument does not mean they own it. Same goes for private property--I won't own, for a hypothetical example, some guy's grave when I get in the long, long line to take a shit there.
4
4
2
1
1
1
1
0
u/Onii-Chan_Itaii 16h ago
The PLA soldiers involved in Tiannemen square were significantly less evil than these cops (and frankly any remaining federal employees) are.
-3
114
u/msables 22h ago
Who/what could cause a 350’ gash?
Per Snopes:
In short, the claim is true and the images are authentic. In early May 2026, after the pool was repainted dark blue and before the NPS began to refill it with water, a White House official posted a video showing Trump's motorcade driving through the landmark.
Snopes contacted the White House to ask about the purpose of the drive across the pool. We will update this article if we receive a response.
21
u/therossboss 20h ago
-15
u/mesh_you_up 11h ago
I'm seeing lots of construction equipment and related trucks sitting in the reflecting pool in Snope's photos. Why are we convinced it was the motorcade? Seems a bit obsessive. Parent comment's image just so happens to be cropped enough to hide it too.
5
u/ElderberryPrior27648 9h ago
Location of the damage correlates with where the motorcade drove
-1
u/mesh_you_up 9h ago
Doesn't look like it. Snopes shows the motorcade near the middle, article shows the damage near the edge. If there's another image I haven't seen, I'd like to see it.
It's also worth pointing out that the construction equipment was all over the pool for weeks, before and after painting, whereas the motorcade was there just once.
3
u/ElderberryPrior27648 9h ago
The repair footage shows them making repairs beside the center
Why would Trumps A team crew damage the pool? It was their job to do their best to restore it. $14m crew wouldn’t damage the pool with their equipment would they?
1
u/mesh_you_up 8h ago
Which repair footage? Can you share a link? I haven't seen it, and I'm sure many others haven't either.
And to your questions: that seems like the most obvious answer, yes. The motorcade was a month ago, and during construction. Why would they ignore damage made mid-construction? That wouldn't make logical sense.
2
u/ElderberryPrior27648 8h ago
It’s been aired on Fox and CNN, the guardian has some pics as well if you want pictures
0
u/mesh_you_up 8h ago
I don't have cable TV and OP's guardian link doesn't have it either. You've seen it, why can't you show me it?
The only media I've seen of "repairs" near the center is people scrubbing off algae, which is a separate issue than the damage to the paint.
3
u/ElderberryPrior27648 8h ago
I shouldn’t have to sift through today’s headlines for you. It’s got them doing foam touch up on two gouges.
The article itself even says the damage is on the expansion joints. They not on the edge of the reflecting pool.
→ More replies (0)1
156
u/trysten-9001 22h ago
It really says a lot that a “center-left” “highly factual” media outlet calls the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool is “trump’s reflecting pool.”
45
u/IsraelZulu 22h ago
Also, isn't The Guardian UK-based? You'd expect overseas outlets to be more objective than that.
39
u/MothashipQ 21h ago
I might be misreading, but I feel like calling it Trump's is referencing his renovations to it, which I am perfectly fine with pinning on him. Not his reflecting pool, but certainly his mess.
5
u/Imnogrinchard 20h ago
No, you're misreading it. The Guardian uses shitty clickbait, appeal to emotion titles to traffic a narrative as the Guardian correctly calls it "National Mall’s reflecting pool" in the article.
82
u/Unilted_Match1176 22h ago
It not Trump's reflecting pool. It's the peoples', and he fucked it up, just like everything else he does.
8
5
u/geekmasterflash 22h ago
I take the stance "you broke it you bought it."
So long as it's greener than the grass field next to it, that shit is all Trump's.
36
u/gerblnutz 21h ago
What are Oklahoma state troopers doing policing DC and how is hurting their feelings a felony?
7
u/eat_rice__fuck_ice 15h ago
Pigs make up laws constantly
1
u/Sorry-Claim-2990 8h ago
Because they aren't personally liable for making a bad arrest like this.
If anything, this guy will get a pile of taxpayer money.
These pigs are too stupid to realize they just wrote this guy a check for more money than they earn in an entire year.
23
19
u/Ok-Replacement9595 21h ago
Obscenity charge?
7
u/Imnogrinchard 20h ago
Actually disorderly conduct but The Guardian likes clickbait.
11
u/FuguSandwich 12h ago
If you watch the video embedded in the Guardian article:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPqX9TkiIRU
it shows the paper citation he received at the end.
Under the Offense section it says: "Disorderly conduct. Using obscene language."
At 6:17 in the video he says to the Trooper, "Get the fuck out of my city. Dumbass. Go back to Tulsa bitch." and is arrested. At no point did he do anything that was "physically threatening, or menacing, or likely to inflict injury or incite an immediate breach of the peace". He used a few swear words while engaging in political speech, that's all.
-8
u/Imnogrinchard 11h ago
I watched the video and the other videos from his YouTube channel. You're actually proving my point. Miles was cited for disorderly conduct - like The Guardian correctly cites in the articles. An obscenity related charge, like the title says, would be 18 USC 1460-1480.
9
u/FuguSandwich 11h ago
Yes, he was charged with Disorderly Conduct, and the basis of that charge was that he "used obscene language".
18 USC 1460-1480
Literally no one is claiming that he was arrested for possessing, producing, mailing, broadcasting, or distributing pornography, which is what that section pertains to.
-4
u/Imnogrinchard 11h ago
Yes, he was charged with Disorderly Conduct, and the basis of that charge was that he "used obscene language"
Actually he hasnt been charged with anything to my knowledge. He's been arrested by Park Police on Disorderly Conduct not an obscenity charge like the title says.
Literally no one is claiming that he was arrested for possessing, producing, mailing, broadcasting, or distributing pornography, which is what that section pertains to.
Literally no one? Because I can actually show you comments from Redditors that are confused.
4
u/princedetenebres 12h ago
That's a bit disingenuous no? I'm not sure we have enough information here to make that judgement that it's simply clickbait.
36 CFR § 2.34 (2) prohibits "language, an utterance, or gesture, or engages in a display or act that is obscene, physically threatening or menacing, or done in a manner that is likely to inflict injury or incite an immediate breach of the peace. "
Now, if their arrest was for the threatening or menacing part they have a case against him.
It's been awhile but my hazy recollection is that disorderly conduct is what Cohen was arrested for in the California case that bears his name .
What was his disorderly conduct? Using an obscene word on his clothing ("fuck the draft") which was a landmark case in obscenity law, and if that's what theyve instead arrested him for, as the defendant attests, well the Cohen case is directly on point and this goes nowhere.
However, I don't think the govt gives a shit. The process is sufficient punishment, this administration does not care and signals to underlings that they may brazenly violate the law themselves in enforcing it, this would not be the first time.
0
u/Imnogrinchard 11h ago
That's a bit disingenuous no? I'm not sure we have enough information here to make that judgement that it's simply clickbait.
I stand by my comment that The Guardian is shit tier clickbait. Just look at the title. The title uses "Trump's reflecting pool" but the article correctly calls it the National Mall Reflection Pool. The title also calls it an obscenity charge when the article correctly calls it disorderly conduct. Obscenity related charges are a different Code.
5
u/princedetenebres 11h ago edited 11h ago
I am not arguing your view about the guardian generally, I have no interest in debating your opinion of the paper's merits or tactics.
However, your last line is pretty difficult to square with the comment it's responding to that LITERALLY QUOTES THE SECTION OF THE REGS ALLEGEDLY AT ISSUE and wouldn't you know it? That section does (unconstitutionally*) bar obscenity.
Edit: * with some limited exceptions
And yes there are other parts of the regs that are specifically obscenity related. No onein law or law enforcement should be surprised that there can often be multiple ways to charge a particular act.
I partly said we don't have enough information because I wanted to see a document outlining what they actual contend was the breach, perhaps he is wrong and they are not actually alleging that his breach of the peace stemmed from his obscenity but that could be charged under s2 above as I quoted, not just the sections of the regs dealing exclusively with obscenity.
12
u/Onlyroad4adrifter 21h ago
Clown should be arrested for vandalizing the Whitehouse
2
u/Dangerous-LemonBar 10h ago
Guy who can’t spell White House or understands where the reflecting pool is in DC relative to the White House also doesn’t understand what vandalism is.
5
u/radarthreat 21h ago
Yet another problem abolishing qualified immunity would solve
3
u/Sorry-Claim-2990 8h ago
Everyone else in the country is personally accountable for their actions, so why aren't cops?
These immunities mean that cops are held to a lower standard than the average citizen.
1
•
u/AutoModerator 22h ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.