Friday, 09 March 2007
 

Court rules 2nd Amendment valid
Contributed by Bill Faith

Appeals Court Strikes Down Washington, D.C. Handgun Ban

WASHINGTON —  A federal appeals court on Friday overturned the District of Columbia's longstanding handgun ban, issuing a decision that will allow the city's citizens to have working firearms in their homes.

In the ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected city officials' arguments that the Second Amendment right to bear arms only applied to state militias.

District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty told reporters Friday afternoon that the District will appeal the ruling.

In a 2-1 decision, the judges held that the activities protected by the Second Amendment "are not limited to militia service, nor is an individual's enjoyment of the right contingent upon his or her continued intermittent enrollment in the militia."

Continue reading "Court rules 2nd Amendment valid"

Contributed by Bill Faith on March 9, 2007 at 04:57 PM in 2nd Amendment, Judicial Wisdom | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Saturday, 30 December 2006
 

Bad Eagle Speaks about a bad man
Contributed by George Mellinger

Bad Eagle, aka David Yeagley has no tears for Saddam, none at all.

The Left is myopic. It cannot, or will not see the larger picture. For all it's claims to promote the good of society, indeed a "well-ordered" society, the Left makes it's decisions on animalistic emotionalism. The immediate reactions. The gut level responses. Almost a Pavlov Dog reaction. Leftists are programmed, "trained" if you please, to respond to any sense of prepared, identified wrong, like the dog was trained to respond to the bell. The executed criminal is put to death without a chance to defend himself, physically. Therefore, it looks like a willing sacrifice, a cruel act of the executioners. Ah, but it's not the executioners. It's the law. The people made the law. The people decided that certain individuals are not worthy of life amongst the people, even among other prisoners. The criminal is only getting exactly what he dealt out to others.

But this requires intellect to [comprehend]. The Left eschews intellect. Intellect is subversive and dangerous. Only the emotions will lead aright. That's the Leftist approach to reality. The Left cannot abstract, it can only emote.

Read the whole thing here . And then prowl a bit around a website deserving much more attention.

And remember, David Yeagley is a native, and he is an American, but he's not a Native American, he's an INDIAN, Search is site and he'll tell you why.

-Rurik.

Contributed by George Mellinger on December 30, 2006 at 01:29 PM in Current Affairs, Dem Dumbness, George Mellinger, Iraq, Judicial Wisdom | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Tuesday, 22 August 2006
 

Judge orders new leak investigation
Contributed by Bill Faith

Judge Orders Justice Department Investigation of Leak to CBS

A federal judge has ordered a Justice Department probe into how CBS News obtained a story two years ago disclosing an FBI investigation into a pro-Israel lobbying group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Judge Thomas Ellis III issued the order last week in connection with the prosecution of two former Aipac employees, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman. The two men are facing criminal charges of conspiracy to acquire and disclose classified information.

[Read on. Hat tip: Ed Morrissey]

It shouldn't take an order from a judge to get an investigation started in a case like this; the investigation should have already been underway. I've had it and then some with the MSM revealing government secrets and getting away with it. In this case announcing that arrests were pending could just as easily have given two spies enough warning to skip town.

Contributed by Bill Faith on August 22, 2006 at 03:41 PM in Bill Faith, Judicial Wisdom, Media Perfidy | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Saturday, 12 August 2006
 

LGF: Photographer Alleges Unearthing of Bodies
Contributed by Bill Faith

From the international photographer’s forum Lightstalkers.org, photojournalist Bryan Denton, in a message from Beirut Lebanon, describes the most vile sort of photo staging imaginable: Lightstalkers :: Staged Shots from Lebanon? Please comment...

i have been working in lebanon since all this started, and seeing the behavior of many of the lebanese wire service photographers has been a bit unsettling. while hajj has garnered a lot of attention for his doctoring of images digitally, whether guilty or not, i have been witness to the daily practice of directed shots, one case where a group of wire photogs were choreographing the unearthing of bodies, directing emergency workers here and there, asking them to position bodies just so, even remove bodies that have already been put in graves so that they can photograph them in peoples arms. these photographers have come away with powerful shots, that required no manipulation digitally, but instead, manipulation on a human level, and this itself is a bigger ethical problem.

[...]

[Read on.Hat tip: Allahpundit, who has much more here.]

Closely realated: LA Times: Take a Closer Look

Ace: BANG: Photographer Admits To Seeing Lebanese Pose Bodies And Even Dig Bodies Up For Presentation To the Media

So, does that explain the dirty baby with the nice clean pacifier?

Contributed by Bill Faith on August 12, 2006 at 06:01 PM in Bill Faith, Hezbollah, Islamism Delenda Est, Israel, Judicial Wisdom, Media Perfidy | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Monday, 10 July 2006
 

Court rules FBI search
of Jefferson’s office was constitutional
Contributed by Bill Faith

Jefferson Corruption Case "Back on Track"

FBI officials say their investigation of Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) can get "back on track" with a ruling by Judge Thomas Hogan denying a motion by Jefferson and the House of Representative's Counsel to return documents the FBI seized from Jefferson's office on May 20 and 21.

Justice Department officials say they had originally hoped to indict Jefferson by June 30 so that the "political situation" in Jefferson's home district could "right itself" before the November election.  Officials say if the documents are now available to them, an indictment is likely sometime this summer.

The House Counsel and Jefferson's own counsel claimed that the Speech and Debate Clause had been violated by the FBI and Justice Department in their ongoing bribery investigation of Jefferson for attempting to influence deals for telecommunications companies in Africa.

In his opinion Judge Hogan wrote, "The Court has found that the search executed on Congressman Jefferson's congressional office was constitutional, as it did not trigger the Speech or Debate Clause privilege, did not offend the principle of the separation of powers, and was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Accordingly, the Court will deny the motion for return of property."

[Read on. H/T: Allah, who comments here.]

***

CQ: Judge: Jefferson Raid Completely Legal

Contributed by Bill Faith on July 10, 2006 at 09:46 PM in Bill Faith, Judicial Wisdom | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Sunday, 09 July 2006
 

HMH's Supreme Court Watch
Contributed by Bill Faith

From my email:

HENRY MARK HOLZER’S SUPREME COURT WATCH
[A project of Madison Press]

As many of you know, after decades of my working in the field of constitutional law— teaching, practicing, and writing books and articles—in early 2006 Madison Press published my book The Keeper of the Flame: The Supreme Court Opinions of Justice Clarence Thomas, analyzing fourteen terms (1991-2005) of this great justice’s opinions.

Since publication of The Keeper of the Flame, I have frequently been asked if I intended to supplement the book by continuing to examine Justice Thomas’s opinions—and whether, while I was at it, I would be willing to comment regularly on all the decisions of the Court. The questions have come from principally from non-lawyers who have a serious interest in Justice Thomas in particular and Supreme Court decisions in general.

I’ve found the idea intriguing, and so that’s what I have decided to do: provide regular commentary on Supreme Court opinions for non-lawyers.

The 2005-2006 term of the Supreme Court of the United States began in early October 2005 and the justices announced the last of their eighty-seven decisions at the end of June 2006. Justice Thomas participated in those decisions either by joining a majority, concurring, or dissenting opinion authored by another member of the Court (writing nothing of his own), or he himself wrote a majority, concurring, or dissenting opinion.

Beginning with the 2005-2006 term just concluded, I will provide regular commentary—from a conservative/libertarian perspective—on every decision of the Supreme Court.

The decisions in which Justice Thomas did not write an opinion, will reveal, albeit not in his own words, where he stood on the issues decided by the Court.

The decisions in which Justice Thomas did write an opinion—majority, concurring, and dissenting—will be treated differently. Just as I have done in The Keeper of the Flame, the opinions authored by Justice Thomas will be analyzed in detail, and then fit, in easily understood language, into the body of his jurisprudence.

In other words, I will provide commentary for the layperson about not only the Court’s overall decisions for terms beginning with 2005-2006, but, more importantly, the commentary will constitute an ongoing supplement to my book The Keeper of the Flame: The Supreme Court Opinions of Justice Clarence Thomas.

Although the facts of each case, the issue(s) to be decided, the factors motivating the decisions, and the conclusions reached by the justices will be presented objectively, my commentary will make abundantly clear whether I think the case’s outcome is “good” or “bad” for conservative/libertarian values. The vehicle for all of this is a website that I’ve just created. It is now on line, and is called “Henry Mark Holzer’s Supreme Court Watch.” Beginning right now, the site can be accessed at www.supremecourtwatch.info).

“Henry Mark Holzer’s Supreme Court Watch” is entirely different from and unconnected to my own website, www.henrymarkholzer.com. As such, it has no relation to that site’s Newsletter, through which I have disseminated much of my, and others’, writing on legal and political topics. Accordingly, that Newsletter mailing list (which I am using for this announcement) will not be used to send email announcements about new Supreme Court decisions posted on “Henry Mark Holzer’s Supreme Court Watch.” I suggest that those of you who are interested in this new website simply bookmark it, and then check from time to time to see what new cases I’ve covered. The Supreme Court’s cases will be discussed when, and in the order, they are decided—so interested readers should have no difficulty in avoiding material already viewed.

Although regular commentary for the just concluded 2005-2006 term will begin to appear in mid-July, because of the importance of the Court’s decision last week in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld ––limiting the president’s power to fight the war against jihad—I have begun, out of order, with that case. My commentary on Hamdan is now available at www.supremecourtwatch.info in the “2005-2006 Term category.”

A “disclaimer” is necessary: No Supreme Court justice had any knowledge of “Henry Mark Holzer’s Supreme Court Watch” prior to this announcement, and no justice has, or will have, any connection with the site in the future. “Henry Mark Holzer’s Supreme Court Watch” is an undertaking entirely of my own, and I alone am responsible for its existence and content.

Please forward this announcement to anyone you think might be interested. Thank you.

HENRY MARK HOLZER

Contributed by Bill Faith on July 9, 2006 at 10:12 AM in Bill Faith, Judicial Stupidity, Judicial Wisdom | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack

Thursday, 06 July 2006
 

NY Court Upholds Judicial Restraint
Contributed by Bill Faith

NY Court Upholds Judicial Restraint
Ed Morrissey

The state Supreme Court of New York turned back an attempt to force the Empire State to recognize same-sex marriage via judicial fiat, ruling that the issue belongs to the legislature and not the courts:

[Read on]

Contributed by Bill Faith on July 6, 2006 at 11:32 AM in Bill Faith, Judicial Wisdom | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack