Oh, yes, he said that, “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges.”
Category: Justice
I’m Hoping He Doesn’t Eat His Gun
There needs to a public accounting of that happened in the killing of Trayvon Martin. With the special prosecutor has charging George Zimmerman witth 2nd degree murder, we should be seeing this:
George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer who fatally shot Florida teenager Trayvon Martin 45 days ago, was charged with second-degree murder Wednesday, marking a turning point in a case that has provoked nationwide debate over racial profiling.
Florida special prosecutor Angela B. Corey, who announced the charge in Jacksonville, said that “the search for justice has brought us to this moment.” Zimmerman turned himself in and was brought Wednesday evening to the Seminole County jail.
Criminal justice lawyers said Corey faces an uphill battle in persuading a jury to convict Zimmerman of second-degree murder. Zimmerman told police he was fighting for his life in an altercation with Martin, who was 17 and unarmed, before he fired in self-defense.
Murder in the second degree, under Florida law, refers to a killing carried out without premeditation but with “a depraved mind regardless of human life.” If convicted, Zimmerman faces a maximum sentence of life in prison. His attorney, Mark O’Mara, [a new lawyer, after his old ones could not reach him, and he starting talking to the prosecutor on his own] said Wednesday that Zimmerman will plead not guilty.
My guess that the murder II charge is about trying to get a plea deal and/or presenting to the jury a way to split the difference and still get a conviction.
Then again, I don’t know what he said when he called the DA.
When Maureen Dowd Isn’t Playing “Too Kool for Skool” She Can Write
Yesterday, she unloaded an impressive can of whup ass on the right-wingers on the Supreme Court.
She is unimpressed with their behavior at the Obamacare hearings, and outraged at their strip search decisions.
This is the first time in a long time that she hasn’t sounded like a Jr. High School girl making fun of some other girl’s shoes.
Go read,
Yes
Does the Supreme Court Have It In for the Democratic Party?
This has been another episode of simple answers to simple questions.
Kevin Drum is wondering whether the Supreme Court, or more accurately its 5 conservative justices, are acting out of a desire to gain political advantage for the Republican Party, rather than just conservative judicial philosophy:
When it comes to judicial activism, conservatives claim that we liberals have nothing to complain about. The Warren Court was famously activist in a liberal direction, after all, and we lefties thought that was just fine. But there’s a real difference here. The famous Warren Court decisions — ending school segregation, expanding the right to counsel, enforcing one-man-one vote, banning organized school prayer — were obviously decisions that conservatives didn’t like. But there was nothing in them that was especially damaging to the interests of the Republican Party.
But things are different this time around.
Indeed.
Undoubtedly.
The tell was in 2001, when they wrote an opinion that amounted to a coup d’etat and said that it could never be used as precedent in Bush v. Gore.
When a judge says you can’t use a ruling as precedent, it’s kind of like a banker telling you that it would they don’t want you purchasing in high commission financial products from them, you had better literally be naked in bed with them, because like it or not, someone is getting f%$#ed.
Well, Here’s Something that You Do Not See Every Day
A business requesting that they be boycotted:
Open Letter to National Organization for Marriage Requesting Boycott of Law Office of Bruce Godfrey
Original Letter
3 April 2012
National Organization for Marriage
Open Letter
By facsimile: (888) 894-3604
Re: Request to Join Boycott List
Dear Madam or Sir:
I write your organization to request that the Law Office of Bruce Godfrey be placed on the boycott list for corporate and business advocates for the recognition of lawful civil same-sex marriage. I would be most grateful for recognition of my small law office as an opponent of your cause in Maryland as you have recognized companies such as Starbucks. While Maryland attorney ethics rules place strict prohibitions on attorney solicitations of prospective clients for hire, no ethics rules prohibit an attorney from asking to join a boycott – as a target.
Bruce Godfrey has been a loud and notorious advocate of lawful civil same-sex marriage recognition in his home state of Maryland for many years. His unapologetic advocacy of equal protection principles and of the equal rights amendment of the Maryland Declaration of Rights advocacy has cost him friendships and business relationships. Godfrey is an inveterate opponent of your cause and a strong supporter of your most implacable legislative foes in the Maryland State House and General Assembly. He earned your boycott through loud commentary on this issue as a straight ally of equal protection of the laws on Facebook alone, and will continue to advocate for equal protection of the laws in Maryland per his Maryland Attorney Oath.
It was said of the late actor Paul Newman that his proudest life achievement was being placed on the infamous “enemies short list” of President Nixon during the Watergate era. If NOM requires a certain amount of achievement in opposition to your aims to merit a boycott, please receive this as a request for the clarification of your boycott criteria so that the Law Office of Bruce Godfrey may, through diligence and honest effort, merit that honor. Please target Bruce Godfrey for boycott; he intends to earn it.
Very truly yours,
Bruce Godfrey, Attorney (MD/DC)
Attorney at Law
Kewl
If They Get Arrested, I Will Pay for the Gloves
By a 5-4 majority, the Supreme Court has said that authorities can strip search you whenever they arrest you.
When juxtaposed with another ruling that allows cops to arrest you for anything, (Seriously, not fastening a seat belt, because the cop in question had a vendetta, and for taking a sip of coke eating one french fry on the DC subway) it means that Rush Limbaugh’s constant refrain of, “Grab your ankles,” has become reality.
Bummer of a Birthmark, Scott
Bummer of a birth mark, Scotty
The recall elections for Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, his Lt. Governor, and 4 state Senators is now officially on:
The recall election ordered Friday for embattled first-term Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker quickly turned into a possible rematch when the Democrat he narrowly defeated in 2010 announced he was jumping into the race.
Walker expressed confidence he would hold on to his seat shortly after the Government Accountability Board ordered the election, after more than 900,000 signatures were collected supporting a recall in the wake of Walker’s push against union bargaining rights. It marks only the third recall of a governor in U.S. history.
Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett announced hours later he would challenge Walker, shaking up a Democratic primary race that had been led by union-backed candidate Kathleen Falk. Barrett has publically clashed with unions who were urging him not to get into the race.
In an email to supporters, Barrett said he would begin campaigning immediately to win the primary that looms just 39 days away on May 8. The general election is June 5.
What’s More, a federal court, invalidated significant portions of his union busting bill today as well:
A federal judge in Madison on Friday ruled that portions of Act 10 – which removed most collective bargaining for most public employees – are unconstitutional.
Though critics of the law welcomed the decision as a major victory, backers seemed unconcerned since it preserved a main limit on bargaining, and suggested broader restrictions would pass muster if applied to all state workers.
Seven major public employee unions had challenged the fact that Act 10 dramatically narrowed what could be bargained by general employee unions, an required those unions to recertify every year, by an absolute majority union while denying the same unions voluntary union dues deductions for payrolls.
The court sided with state officials in upholding limitations on what can be bargained, but found the two other provisions violated the union members’ equal protection and First Amendment rights, considering that the same rules did not apply to unions for public safety workers such as police and firefighters.
I’m not sure how the election is going to go, though my guess is that it will flip the state senate, since it’s now a one senator margin.
In a very real way, the recall against Scott Walker may be the most important election of this cycle, because if he loses, it will create a bright line in the political process.
Of course, if he wins, the Republicans will take it as carte blanche, even if they lose the Senate.
OOPS!!!
The FBI had to rush and arrest Khalifah al-Akili after he sent out an email to his friends and the Guardian newspaper that he was being targeted for entrapment by them:
The arrest of a Pittsburgh man described as a Taliban sympathiser has sparked allegations that the FBI deployed a notorious confidential informant used in previous controversial stings on suspected Muslim radicals.
Khalifah al-Akili, 34, was arrested in a police raid on his home on March 15. He was later charged with illegally possessing a gun after having previous felony convictions for drug dealing. However, at his court appearance an FBI agent testified that al-Akili had made radical Islamic statements and that police had uncovered unspecified jihadist literature at his home.
But, in a strange twist, al-Akili’s arrest came just days after he had sent out an email to friends and local Muslim civil rights groups complaining that he believed he was the target of an FBI “entrapment” sting. That refers to a controversial FBI tactic of using confidential informants – who often have criminal records or are paid large sums of money – to facilitate “fake” terrorist plots for suspects to invent or carry out.
In the email – which was also sent to the Guardian before al-Akili was arrested – he detailed meeting two men he believed were FBI informants because of the way they talked about radical Islam and appeared to want to get him to make jihadist statements. According to his account, one of them, who called himself Saeed Torres, asked him to buy a gun. Al-Aikili said he refused. The other, who was called Mohammed, offered to help him go to Pakistan for possible Islamic radical training. Al-Akili also refused.
It looks like the FBI was was trying to manufacture some more terrorists, and when this guy started realized that some weird sh%$ was going down, and emailed the press, they busted him.
Let’s be clear, he is being charged with breaking the law. It is allied alleged that as a felon, he did break the law when he fired a friend’s rifle at the range 2 years ago, but he’s being held without bail because prosecutors are alleging that he is a terrorist.
This isn’t making us any safer, and I cannot imagine how this can do anything but feed distrust of law enforcement among among American Muslims.
David Frum is Right
If the healthcare mandate is illegal, so are the mandatory private retirement funds that are so dear to the right wing think tanks is illegal too.
So, if SCOTUS strikes down Obamacare, there is a silver lining. It takes Social Security privatization off the table.
In fact, it might have the effect of ruling out a lot of the misguided “Market Based Solutions.”
Why I am Not Covering the Scotus Arguments Over Obamacare
Because I think that the law and precedent is clear, and the only questionis whether there are 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 justices who are corrupt enough, and partisan enough, to vote to strike down the act.
If Kennedy votes not to strike down, I think that he takes Roberts with him, giving a 6-3 decision, but if he swings the other way, so does Roberts.
The Chief Justice will not be on the dissenting side of this vote, because of the optics, not because of the law.
Roberts may be a corrupt partisan hack, but he only uses the secret sauce when it makes a difference in the final decision.
My guess is that it will be 4-5 to strike down much of the law, but if not, it will be 6-3 supporting it.
What must be noted though is that this is not a matter of law. The law has been settled for at least 60 years.
The only question is how corrupt the 5 right wing justices are.
The Banksters Acts Exceed My Cynicism
When a mortgage firm sues their servicer because for being too cooperative with the people that they cheated:
Just when you think you’ve seen it all in mortgage-backed securities litigation, along comes the likes of Sand Canyon to prove you wrong.
The onetime California mortgage lender, which stopped originating loans in late 2007 and sold its servicing business to American Home Mortgage Servicing in 2008, has filed a complaint in New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan that accuses American Home of making it too easy for MBS trustees and insurers to get hold of underlying loan files. In essence, Sand Canyon’s lawyers at Cahill Gordon & Reindel are arguing that the servicer should be helping it thwart claims that it breached representations and warranties about the mortgages it sold to MBS issuers, not smoothing the way for put-back demands.Sand Canyon’s 26-page complaint, filed last month, asserts that American Home pledged to act as an ally when it bought the servicing business in 2008. “Sand Canyon bargained for and obtained (American Home’s) cooperation in connection with Sand Canyon’s defense,” the complaint said. Under their agreement, according to the complaint, American Home was supposed to “refrain from disclosing confidential loan information to third parties except as required by law.”Most pooling and servicing agreements permitted MBS trustees and insurers to see underlying loan files only during regular business hours and at the servicer’s offices, according to the Sand Canyon complaint. But American Home, the suit alleged, has provided electronic records in response to demands from trustees and insurers.
Until we start putting these f%$#s in prison, and we seize every penny that they have through RICO and asset forfeiture, they aren’t going to stop.
We need to put some of them in jail for the rest of their lives, and when they die, we need to take their fillings.
I Don’t Know Whether to be Heartened or Depressed
I am talking about the murder of Trayvon Martin, where both the Feds and the DA are opening investigations of what is clearly a murder. I guess that a few days of international condemnation got them moving:
Seven years after Florida adopted its sweeping self-defense law, the shooting of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager, has put that law at the center of an increasingly angry debate over how he was killed and whether law enforcement has the authority to charge the man who killed him.
The law, called Stand Your Ground, is one of 21 such laws around the country, many of them passed within the last few years. In Florida, it was pushed heavily by the National Rifle Association but opposed vigorously by law enforcement.
It gives the benefit of the doubt to a person who claims self-defense, regardless of whether the killing takes place on a street, in a car or in a bar — not just in one’s home, the standard cited in more restrictive laws. In Florida, if people feel they are in imminent danger from being killed or badly injured, they do not have to retreat, even if it would seem reasonable to do so. They have the right to “stand their ground” and protect themselves.
That is precisely the question in the case: Was the gunman, George Zimmerman, 28, a white Hispanic crime watch volunteer in Sanford, Fla., in imminent danger and acting in self-defense during his encounter with Trayvon Martin, as he asserts?
In the three weeks since Trayvon, 17, a well-liked high school student from Miami with no criminal record, was killed, public protests have grown larger and louder, and so have calls for Mr. Zimmerman’s arrest. The Police Department in Sanford, near Orlando, said that under the law, it had no call to bring charges.
But late Monday, the Department of Justice said it had opened an inquiry into the shooting. It will run parallel with one announced on Tuesday by the state attorney in Seminole County, who said a grand jury would be convened. State attorneys use grand juries in cases when they cannot make a clear independent call, or when a case is explosive.
(emphasis mine)
Let’s be clear what happened: A white, self appointed “neighborhood watch” with a history of harassment in the neighborhood, chased a black child down down, and shot him, and the police said that they were sorry, but there was nothing that they could do.
It was only after this blew up that the DA decided to convene a grand jury, because, it became too embarrassing.
If this hadn’t made the news, it would just be one more dead black person, in a town with a long and notorious history of law enforcement racism and corruption, and it would have been “nothing to see here, move along.”
So, it looks like there might actually be an investigation (good) but only because there was an international outcry (not good).
Me, I’m a glass half empty kind of guy.
The Supreme Court Pushes Back on Patents Again
They just struck down two patents on a drug dosage calibration method:
The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a unanimous blow to Prometheus Laboratories by saying that its methods of dosage calibration for thiopurine drugs for gastrointestinal and nongastrointestinal autoimmune diseases are ineligible for patenting. In a decision written by Justice Stephen G. Breyer, the high court overturned the decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit last December. The Federal Circuit had upheld the two diagnostic method patents, which covered the methods designed to take into account the context of a treatment regime based on the individual patient’s metabolism.
“To transform an unpatentable law of nature into a patent eligible application of such a law, a patent must do more than simply state the law of nature while adding the words ‘apply it,’” the court stated. “It must limit its reach to a particular, inventive application of the law.”
Prometheus’ patents failed that test, according to the court: “We conclude that the patent claims at issue here effectively claim the underlying laws of nature themselves. The claims are consequently invalid.”
Through the ruling, Breyer answered the question he posed to attorneys for both sides during oral arguments in December: “What has to be added to a law of nature to make it a patentable process?”
Basically the “method” was to measure the metabolite levels of a drug in order to determine appropriate dosages.
Yeah, that’s something that a medical intern has learned in his first year, or in med school, for the past 50+ years, but they took out a patent.
Prometheus claimed that the human body was the machine conducted the transformation.
It’s another in a streak of brush-backs to the U.S. Circuit Court for the Federal Circuit, aka the Patent Court, which expanded the reach of patents since its creation over the past 30 years.
The patent system long ago went from a system to encourage innovation to one that strangles it.
Quote of the Day
I’ll say what Joe didn’t: The prosecutors need to cut a deal with one of the small fish in order to catch a big (or bigger) fish. Perhaps with MFG’s Treasurer or Comptroller. If it were me, I’d let the Defense bar know that we have 3 potential immunity deals that go to the first takers (with several hi profile exceptions).
This is just like prosecuting drug dealers — you pick up the dime bag seller, roll them to the mid-level guy, repeat. Keep doing that until you reach as close to the top as you can get.
Works for pot, crack, robo-signing, and segregated account theft . . .
—Barry Ritholtz on how to prosecute MF Global executives for stealing customer funds
Pat Robertson Wants Marijuana Decriminalized?
No, seriously, I am not joking:
Of the many roles Pat Robertson has assumed over his five-decade-long career as an evangelical leader — including presidential candidate and provocative voice of the right wing — his newest guise may perhaps surprise his followers the most: marijuana legalization advocate.
“I really believe we should treat marijuana the way we treat beverage alcohol,” Mr. Robertson said in an interview on Wednesday. “I’ve never used marijuana and I don’t intend to, but it’s just one of those things that I think: this war on drugs just hasn’t succeeded.”
Mr. Robertson’s remarks echoed statements he made last week on “The 700 Club” the signature program of his Christian Broadcasting Network, and other comments he made in 2010. While those earlier remarks were largely dismissed by his followers, Mr. Robertson has now apparently fully embraced the idea of legalizing marijuana, arguing that it is a way to bring down soaring rates of incarceration and reduce the social and financial costs.
“I believe in working with the hearts of people, and not locking them up,” he said.
Mr. Robertson’s remarks were hailed by pro-legalization groups, who called them a potentially important endorsement in their efforts to roll back marijuana penalties and prohibitions, which residents of Colorado and Washington will vote on this fall.
All this while the Obama administration doubles down on the war on drugs.
Rev. Robinson isn’t any smarter than the Obama administration, but he also hasn’t been captured by government bureaucracies , and he doesn’t feel the need to outflank his political opposition by running to the right, so he actually can consider what is optimal policy.
If Pat Roberson can get this right, anyone can.
Iceland Does it Right
Not only are they prosecuting their banksters, they have put a former PM in the dock:
The trial of former Icelandic Prime Minister Geir Haarde, on charges of negligence over the 2008 financial crisis, has begun in Reykjavik.
Mr Haarde is thought to be the first world leader to face criminal charges over the crisis.
He rejects the charges as “political persecution” and has said he will be vindicated during the trial.
The country’s three main banks collapsed during economic turmoil and the failure of Icesave hit thousands.
With a population less than that of Baltimore City, Iceland seems to have cornered the market on both balls and common sense where the financial meltdown is involved than the other 6.8 billion of us.
Go figure.
It Sucks to be Scott Walker
A federal judge has issued an injunction against Wisconsin’s voter ID law, so it’s now almost certain that his recall election will be free of his voter suppression tactics:
A Wisconsin law requiring voters to show photo identification to receive a ballot was temporarily blocked by a state judge after a civil rights group sued Governor Scott Walker over the measure.
Judge David Flanagan in Dane County yesterday ruled that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People demonstrated a probability of success in overturning the 2011 law and that a temporary injunction was necessary to prevent “irreparable harm.”
“If no injunction is issued, a clearly improper impairment of a most vital element of our society will occur,” Flanagan wrote in his order. “The duty of the court is clear. The case has been made.”
Democrats and Republicans are at odds over voting laws before the 2012 elections. Democrats say they are seeking to ensure voters’ access to the polls while Republicans such as Walker argue more needs to be done to prevent voter fraud. Similar suits claiming the Wisconsin law unconstitutionally burdens the rights of people including senior citizens and minorities are pending in state and federal court.
The ‘Phants are making noises about the primary, but what they really want to do is prevent minorities from voting in the Scott Brown recall.
It’s not gonna happen.
Well it might happen when it hits the Roberts Supreme Court, but that is at least a year away.
Eric Holder Argues that Assassination is Legal
Jeebus. It’s now OK to murder an American citizen because the President says so:
Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday explained why it’s legal to murder people — not to execute prisoners convicted of capital crimes, not to shoot someone in self-defense, not to fight on a battlefield in a war that is somehow legalized, but to target and kill an individual sitting on his sofa, with no charges, no arrest, no trial, no approval from a court, no approval from a legislature, no approval from we the people, and in fact no sharing of information with any institutions that are not the president.
…………
By “government” Holder means the president, whether President Obama or President Romney or President Santorum or any man or woman who later becomes president, and nobody else. That one person alone is to decide what is appropriate and lawful and feasible. If the Vice President thinks it is feasible to capture somene, too bad for him. He should have gotten a better job if he wanted to be a decider. If the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court thinks preaching against the United States is not a capital offense, tough tamales. He shouldn’t dress in his bathrobe if he wants to be taken seriously. If the United States Congress objects that the president’s “surgical strikes” tend to kill too many random men, women, and children, well they know what they can do: Run for president! If the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings has objections, well — Isn’t that SPECIAL? And the American people? They can shut up or vote for a racist buffoon from the bad party.
…………
But you see, this is all OK, because Barack Obama is a good guy, so no countervailing government structures, or for that matter any public access to information needs to be allowed:
A consensus has emerged during the presidency of Barack Obama. His administration is increasingly regarded as the worst on issues related to freedom of information and transparency.
Today, Josh Gerstein of POLITICO has a story that gives voice to this emerging consensus, which more and more open government advocates hold despite the fact that the Obama Administration maintains it is committed to “openness.”
Gerstein’s story features a quote from a Washington-based lawyer “who’s been filing” Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests since 1978. The lawyer, Katherine Mayer, says, “Obama is the sixth administration that’s been in office since I’ve been doing Freedom of Information Act work. … It’s kind of shocking to me to say this, but of the six, this administration is the worst on FOIA issues. The worst. There’s just no question about it.”
Think about this for a second: This is all predicated on the idea that the Executive is a good guy who won’t abuse power, and so there is no need for checks and balances.
This is why I call Barack Obama the worst constitutional law professor ever.
Quote of the Day
A lawyer for Mr. Strauss-Kahn appeared to confirm that he had attended the events, saying that his client would not have been aware if the women who entertained him were prostitutes.
“He could easily not have known, because as you can imagine, at these kinds of parties you’re not always dressed, and I challenge you to distinguish a naked prostitute from any other naked woman,” the lawyer, Henri Leclerc, told a French radio station, Europe 1, in December.
The rich REALLY are not like you and me.
H/t Brad Delong.
Federal Court is Dubious of Republican Redistricting in Wisconsin
Republican lawmakers said Tuesday they believe they have no power to make changes to election maps they approved last summer, inserting new questions into fast-changing litigation over those maps.
A trial over those maps began with a surprise Tuesday, when the presiding judge told the attorneys to confer with top legislative leaders and others to consider redrawing the maps taking into account legal challenges from Democrats and Latinos.
After a day of consultation, an attorney for the state told the three federal judges that top Republicans were willing to consider making changes to the maps but believed a 1954 opinion by the state Supreme Court prevented them from doing so. The attorney, Dan Kelly, said the state’s high court had found lawmakers can make changes to the maps just once a decade.
Two groups suing the state disagree and say the Legislature still has the ability to make changes.
Tuesday’s developments left numerous questions in place – including when the trial may continue in earnest. The presiding judge told the attorneys to be available Wednesday to return to court with 45 minutes notice, but made clear the court may rule only on the relatively narrow issue of the extent to which an attorney for the Legislature would have to later testify.
The panel – which includes two judges appointed by Republican presidents and one appointed by a Democratic president – has repeatedly criticized Republican lawmakers in written orders for their secretive process for drawing the maps.
On Tuesday, presiding Judge J.P. Stadtmueller did the same shortly after hearing that attorneys for the legislators had released a new batch of emails Friday that they had not previously disclosed they had. The release of emails came a day after the court had ordered the lawmakers’ attorneys to make public a separate group of emails.
“The facts are the facts and what has occurred here is beyond the pale in terms of lack of transparency (and) secrecy,” Stadtmueller said. “Appearances are everything and Wisconsin has prided itself one generation after another on openness and fairness in doing the right thing. And to be frank we have seen everything but that in the way this case has proceeded.”
Almost all lawmakers signed secrecy agreements about the maps and they tried repeatedly to prevent their aides from having to testify or produce documents. Those attempts were unsuccessful, and last month the panel ordered the Republicans’ attorneys to pay the other side $17,500 for filing frivolous motions.
Here’s a hint to the Republicans in the WI legislature and their attorneys: When the judges demand the testimony of one your counsels, and fine your attorneys 17½ grand, your prospects are not good.
When you have pissed off the judges this much, Clarence Darrow couldn’t help you.