Archive for the ‘the courts’ Category

A sensible but surprising decision

Posted: August 16, 2010 by datechguy in the courts
Tags: ,

It’s kind of sad that my expectations for the 9th circuit are so low that I expected them to do the foolish thing but every now and then they surprise me.

The argument that there was no harm was weak, because the 9th Circuit certainly saw what happened in the state court process, where the California Supreme Court, though upholding Prop. 8, had to grapple with what to do with same sex couples who had married in the interim. The 9th Circuit didn’t need that headache, and neither did society. Given the expedited schedule, the relatively short delay in such marriages resulting from a stay was not enough to overcome the legal chaos similar to what happened in the state courts.

Let’s hope the process is expedited, the longer people on both sides are kept waiting the worse it is. I would think the issues have been gone over and over so it wouldn’t be too hard but then again decisions are always easier when you don’t have to make them so I guess I should be patient with the people who are charged to do so.

And for those who can’t wait, there is always Massachusetts, particularly for the fall foliage.

Update: If I was more cynical I would think this might have something to do with it:

That decision came as a huge disappointment to the activists who sought to have Prop 8 declared unconstitutional. But it was a relief for the White House, meaning that a potentially divisive issue would not play out during the fall midterm elections.

Democratic pollster Geoff Garin, who is close with top White House officials, said Obama has “suffered through a season of distractions. He didn’t need one more distraction.”

After all nobody would ever suspect the 9th circuit of playing politics, would we?

What hath Judge Judy Wrought?

Posted: August 6, 2010 by datechguy in opinion/news, the courts
Tags: , , ,

Bad Lawyer tells the story of a Judge in Washington State that is in some trouble:

[The] court ruled Thursday that King County District Judge Judith Eiler violated rules requiring judges to be ‘patient, dignified, and courteous’ to defendants, lawyers and others.

Five justices, led by Justice Jim Johnson, ruled in favor of the five-day suspension plus censure. But four others insisted that Eiler should be subject to a 90-day suspension recommended by the Commission on Judicial Conduct.”
___________________________
I’ve witnessed this routine many times over the years. As I’ve said previously, there is some frustration on the part of some judges that they are powerless to actually affect behavior of the defendants who appear, oftentimes, again and again before them. The judges aspire to say something that might register in a positive way on these folks that will work to the advantage of the justice system and the community. This is especially true in “small law” courts.

At Simple Justice we see that Judge Judy is to blame.

Nowhere in the judges’ handbook does it require jurists to employ sugarcoating or gobbledygook in the performance of their duties. But when you put on a robe, part of the deal is that you exercise discretion and hold that sharp tongue. It’s not that judges don’t think that people are idiots, but they can’t say it. They just can’t.

The problem, of course, is that Judge Judy is unbelievably popular, maybe even one of the best things to happen to the legal system, as far as the public is concerned, in a long time. People love to watch Judge Judy jump to baseless conclusions and rip people’s lungs out through their nose. Swift, brutal justice. How fun! Unless you happen to be the one whose nostrils are at stake

How many people back in the 60’s took up Science because of the Professor from Gilligans Island or Scotty from Star Trek? If you decide to get into the law because of Judge Judy, it just might not be what you imagine to be. etiquette

…and Cynthia Yockey rebutts

Posted: August 6, 2010 by datechguy in internet/free speech, opinion/news, the courts
Tags: , ,

You’ve read and examined my opinion of Gay Marriage. Making the case for the other side a blogger I respect who is just as nice in person as she is committed to what she believes, my friend Cynthia Yockey:

The fundamental rationale social conservatives advance for denying equal treatment to lesbians and gays under the law — including the liberty and freedom to choose sexual partners and spouses on the same bases that straight people use: sexual attraction and love — is that gays are intrinsically evil.

This of course is not the Catholic position but the number of people who make that argument is not insignificant to say the least.

Read her whole post and her others on the subject. Her opinion is worth hearing and understanding. After all once can’t be secure in one’s own opinion and beliefs and be unwilling or unable to hear the other side without rancor.

My Shirley Sherrod Sucker post…

Posted: July 30, 2010 by datechguy in internet/free speech, the courts
Tags: ,

has produced some reaction in comments and from some friends who were surprised at my reaction. For those who are unsure, two posts at other blogs make my point best.

The short version comes from Robert Stacy:

A government official successfully pursuing a defamation suit against a private citizen is quite nearly impossible.

Any responsible lawyer would provide three words of helpful advice to Shirley Sherrod: “Discovery’s a bitch.”

The long version is at the American Thinker:

This past Sunday, in his weekly column for the San Francisco Chronicle, “Willie’s World,” veteran black politico Willie Brown confirmed that “there is more to the story than just [Sherrod’s] remarks.”

“As an old pro,” Brown acknowledged, “I know that you don’t fire someone without at least hearing their side of the story unless you want them gone in the first place.” Brown observed that Sherrod had been a thorn in the USDA’s side for years, that many had objected to her hiring, and that she had been “operating a community activist organization not unlike ACORN.” Although Brown does not go into detail, he alludes to a class action lawsuit against the USDA in which she participated some years ago.

In the way of background, in 1997, a black farmer named Timothy Pigford, joined by four hundred other black farmers, filed a lawsuit against Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman, claiming that the USDA treated black farmers unfairly in all manner of ways, from price support loans to disaster payments to operating loans. Worse, they charged that the USDA had failed to process any complaints about racial discrimination.

The notion that the Clinton Ag Department had spent four years consciously denying black farmers their due defies everything we know about Clinton’s use of race and should have made the media suspicious about Pigford’s claims dating back to 1983.

Flush with revenue in 1999 and eager to appease this bedrock constituency, the administration settled with the farmers — more realistically, their attorneys — for fifty grand apiece, plus various other perks like tax offsets and loan forgiveness. If any of the presumably racist USDA offenders were punished, that news escaped the media.

Is this all talk? Is there an actual suit that will be filed? Boy does this administration hope not.

Older Entries
Newer Entries