Home » Trump’s EO and the law, revisited

Comments

Trump’s EO and the law, revisited — 11 Comments

  1. Trump’s “thought crimes” or perhaps “hate-speech crimes” are the crux of the legal matter. And I thought (naively) that such judicial ruminations outside the black letter of law could not possibly fit within the realm of normal jurisprudence.

    But I heard Judge Napolitano, a couple hours ago, state that the Supreme Court HAS allowed judges to look at the entirety of previous statements made by executives when judging their current proclamations and actions. (Insert favorite expression of exasperation &/or despair here.)

  2. I read that one of the Senators asked Yates when she became a member of the Supreme Court based on her opinion that the EO was unconstitutional.

    I remember pundits talking about the expiration dates of any statement made by Obama. And, Obama was allowed to “evolve” on issues.

    Apparently, for a Republican leader, there is no expiration date on acts, words, promises, etc. Any change, based on time or better information, is still called a flip-flop.

  3. An “off the cuff” suggestion; any lawyer who within one year loses 3 times is immediately disbarred as having themselves made the case for their incompetence. This alone will discourage becoming a lawyer, while also reducing the number of lawyers.

    Any federal judge whose rulings are overturned 3 times within a year by a higher court on appeal must be removed from office having also demonstrated their incompetence.

    Each year they start with a clean slate. 3 strikes and you’re out…

    This will weed out the incompetents over time and might eventually ensure that SCOTUS nominees are drawn from a pool with a high percentage of constitutionalists.

  4. I listened to the Fourth Circuit hearing on C-Span yesterday. Many of the judges were not buying the convoluted reasoning of the ACLU lawyer. ‘Twas music to my ears. But who knows how they will rule. If they uphold the EO, it will surprise me. (Yes, I’m that cynical about our courts.)

  5. Lawyers that repeatedly loose cases probably loose clients? Do they become politicians or employees of the government; regulators, staffers to congress critters, employees of stat and federal legal aid services?

    Pass a law to regulate the legal profession and restrict it’s access to the rice bowl? Good luck with that.

  6. The Other Chuck:

    That comment regarding Geoffrey’s three strikes for lawyers was from OM. The “Leave a Reply” field had your name for some reason. Sorry. I hope it was not a return engagement of the comment gremlin.

  7. Geoffrey Britain Says:
    May 9th, 2017 at 4:22 pm

    Three strikes and you’re out is the rule for “criminals” – why not for “judges” — and maybe extend to politicians: lose 3 elections on any given level and you are ineligible to stand again for that office.

  8. Geoffrey:

    Article V, Convention of States. Try the Liberty Amendments by Marc Levin, for serious thoughts on where to begin.

  9. A reasonably sane suggestion: shouldn’t we at least find out what level of immigration is acceptable before fighting over how it is to be done?

    http://blog.dilbert.com/post/160447583616/wheres-my-immigration-prediction-model

    “My provocative thought for today is that the pro-immigration people and the anti-immigration people are actually on the same side and don’t know it because no one has made an immigration prediction model. For this claim, I will exclude the extremes on both sides, so subtract out the true open-border globalist on the left and the pure racists on the right. We’ll focus on the sensible middle that wants some degree of immigration while maintaining the good parts of the existing culture. But how does either side decide how much is the right amount of Muslim immigration, and how much is too much? Where’s my immigration prediction model?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>