You remember this story, don’t you? It caused a battle between pro-cop and anti-cop Congressman a few months ago.
Well, it’s baaaack…
Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Mo., on Wednesday displayed the controversial painting that was removed from the Capitol complex after complaints that it depicted police officers as pigs.
The painting was displayed for weeks before Republicans complained and asked that it be taken down by the Architect of the Capitol. He blamed Republicans for “acts of theft” after GOP lawmakers took it down a few times in protest.
Clay complained on the floor that the painting was removed in an act of “politically motivated, unconstitutional retroactive censorship.”
He was joined on the floor by other Democrats, including Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., who called the painting a “pretty amazing” piece of art.
“PRETTY AMAZING”? This painting is a disgrace!
“My constituents’ winning entry was removed in an act of politically motivated unconstitutional retroactive censorship.”
.@LacyClayMO1: “My constituents’ winning entry was removed in an act of politically motivated unconstitutional retroactive censorship.”.@LacyClayMO1: “My constituents’ winning entry was removed in an act of politically motivated unconstitutional retroactive censorship.” pic.twitter.com/VoKAk70ReM
— CSPAN (@cspan) April 26, 2017
IN CASE YOU FORGOT WHAT HAPPENED WITH THIS PAINTING:
In case you haven’t heard of the controversy surrounding the painting:
Congressman Lacy Clay plans on filing a federal lawsuit regarding the removal of a painting that was taken down from display in the Capitol building because it portrayed police officers as pigs. The truth is that the painting broke the rules of a contest that took place to pick the painting that would hang in the capitol. Basically, this is grandstanding…he has no case. Here’s what kmov had to say about this new development:
The office of a Democratic Missouri congressman says he intends to file a federal lawsuit over the removal of a constituent’s painting from a display on Capitol Hill.
The painting depicts protests in Ferguson, Missouri, that erupted after a police shooting of an unarmed black man.
The painting depicts a pig in a police uniform pointing a gun at a protester. It was one of 400-plus winning entries in the Congressional Arts Competition.
It was on display for more than seven months, but the Capitol architect removed the painting last month after some lawmakers complained.
Congressman William Lacy Clay’s office says he will file a suit Tuesday in response to what he claims is the “arbitrary and unconstitutional disqualification and removal” of the painting.
THE PAINTING CAME DOWN AFTER MUCH BACK AND FORTH:
The painting in the Capitol building at the center of controversy because it depicts the police as pigs will FINALLY COME DOWN!
Missouri Democrat Lacy Clay has been in a tug of war with Republicans over whether it should hang in the hallway connecting the House office buildings to the Capitol. Several congressmen, including Reps. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) and Brian Babin (R-Texas) have, on separate occasions, removed the painting and returned it to Clay’s office:
FED UP GOP CONGRESSMAN Removes Cop-Hating Artwork Hung In U.S. Capitol By BLM Activist Congressman
The Congressional Black Caucus got into the middle of the tug-of-war about the painting with one member saying he “might have to kick somebody’s a**”:
As it turns out, the painting is in violation of “Suitability Guidelines”:
THE RULES PROHIBIT ART THAT DEPICTS “subjects of contemporary political controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature…”
According to FOX News:
Architect of the Capitol Stephen Ayers determined the painting violates the House Building Commission’s rules and will be removed Tuesday after the federal holiday.
Rep. Dave Reichert (R-Wash.), the former Sheriff of King County, Washington, wrote to Ayers demanding the artwork be removed, and arguing the painting “is in clear violation of the Suitability Guidelines outlined in the official rules for the competition.”
In particular, Reichert asserted that the rules bar art that depicts “subjects of contemporary political controversy or a sensationalistic or gruesome nature.”…
