Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

/var/www/vhosts/legalinsurrection.com/httpdocs/wp-content/themes/bridge-child/readFeeds.incFALSE

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 13, 2015 20 Comments
Back in December of 2013, a woman named Justine Sacco boarded a plane in New York that was bound for South Africa. She was planning to visit family for the holidays. She tweeted what was perceived as a politically incorrect message to her tiny Twitter following and by the time she landed, she was national news. While she was in the air, her tweets were discovered and promoted by writers at Gawker and BuzzFeed and then the rest of the Twittersphere went into a fury. Professor Jacobson addressed the issue:
Yesterday was the worst Twitter day of all time. Or at least the worst that I remember. Some lady no one had ever heard of and who had about 100 followers at the time sent the Tweet above. The tweet went viral.... Whoever started it, plenty of websites picked up on it and ran with it to feed the mob and not miss out on clicks and eyeballs. By the time I saw it, long after she became a hunted woman, my first impression was similar to that of John Nolte at Breitbart.com: Looks like the type of “white privilege” claptrap we read almost weekly at Salon.com or Slate.com. Some liberal white person coming to grips with her privilege and wanting the whole world to know about it.... Racist? You’d need to know a lot more. Maybe shoot her a tweet back and ask what she meant, or look her up and send her an email before proclaiming her to be a racist. But no one could do that. She was on an airplane to visit her native South Africa. For 11 hours. And in those 11 hours she became a hated and hunted woman.... Greg Gutfeld summed it up best:
Ms. Sacco was fired from her job as a result. Here's a video report ABC News provided at the time:

LATEST NEWS

Posted by Amy Miller on February 13, 2015 28 Comments
Rick Perry may be polling in the single digits, but that hasn't stopped the former Texas governor from pushing ahead with a messaging strategy that emphasizes experience over rhetoric, and results over flash. Via the AP:
Perry, who is considering a second run for president, wrapped up a two-day trip to New Hampshire with a speech at the Strafford County Republican Committee's Lincoln Day Dinner. While he repeated his warning that GOP voters shouldn't nominate a "critic in chief," he had plenty of criticism for President Barack Obama, saying his lack of executive experience before becoming president has hurt him and that he hasn't picked up many management skills on the job. The nation is ready, he said, to move beyond "eight years of this years of this young, very attractive, amazing orator, junior U.S. senator." "I don't think they're going to go there," Perry said. "They're going to go to a tested, results-oriented executive who has a record of accomplishment."
This isn't the first time Perry has thrown shade at his younger potential opponents. During his interview last week with the Texas Tribune, Perry emphasized his own experience over that of other, untested candidates:
Asked about what separates him from Cruz, Perry never mentioned his potential rival by name. Instead, he downplayed Senate experience and alluded to the fact that Cruz’s tenure in office is the same as then-Sen. Barack Obama's when he ran for president in 2008. “It’s one of the selling points, if you will, to the American people as they decide who’s going to follow Barack Obama,” he said. “I think they’re going to make a rather radical shift, away from a young, untested United States senator whose policies have really failed.”
Ba-zing---because it's true.

Posted by Andrew Branca on February 12, 2015 14 Comments
Yesterday a federal district court in the 5th Circuit ordered summary judgment in favor of several plaintiffs who challenged existing restrictions on handgun transfers across state lines; the court found that the federal government’s existing handgun transfer ban was unconstitutional both on its face and applied to the facts of this case, under both strict scrutiny and intermediate scrutiny, and on 5th Amendment Due Process grounds. The order in the case of Mance v. Holder (PDF at bottom of post) is refreshingly clearly written, and I encourage even non-lawyers to “read the whole thing.” ™ In this post I’ll touch upon the high points of the decision, as well as some reasonably likely (and unlikely) practical consequences. First things first: a huge congratulations to Attorney Alan Gura for another tremendous win for the Second Amendment. While the immediate practical effects of this order are likely to be limited, it is yet another ratcheting of the law in the right direction. Everyone remembers, of course, that it was Alan who successfully litigated both of the groundbreaking Second Amendment cases Heller and McDonald before the US Supreme Court.

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

U. Michigan Student Faces Assault, Battery Charges After Attacking Jewish Activist

Washington State U. Bans Fall Rush for Fraternities, Sororities Starting in 2027

Illinois Teacher Union Boss Gets Substantial Pay Raise Despite Low State Reading Scores

Faculty Senate at Northwestern Calls for Restrictions on ICE Access to Campus

Oregon State Instructor Reports Student for Arguing There are Only Two Sexes

University of San Francisco Ditching Mascot Over Student Complaints

SEE MORE

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on February 12, 2015 9 Comments
In a 93-5 vote, the Senate voted to confirm Ash Carter as the new Secretary of Defense. Carter will replace Chuck Hagel who was fired resigned in November of last year. Hagel took his licks as President Obama's perpetual fall guy, a concern Senator McCain shares for Mr. Carter as well. If you were unable to watch the confirmation hearings, this is a great wrap up: CNN Reports:
The Senate easily confirmed Ashton Carter, a former number two at the Pentagon, to be the new Secretary of Defense. The vote was 93 to 5. He will take the helm at DOD as the United States is immersed in several complex national security challenges across the globe, including the widening military campaign against ISIS.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 12, 2015 16 Comments
The student government at a university in South Africa recently voted to expel Jews:
The vice chancellor of Durban University of Technology (DUT) in South Africa on Wednesday rejected the student council’s call to expel Jewish students who do not support the Palestinian cause. University Vice Chancellor Professor Ahmed Bawa released a statement calling the demand “outrageous, preposterous and a deep violation of our National Constitution and every human rights principle.” He added, “No student at DUT will be discriminated against on the basis of religion, race, gender, political affiliation or sexual orientation.” Bawa also told South Africa’s Daily News that the request was “totally unacceptable.” The demand to expel all Jewish students, especially those who do not support the Palestinian agenda, was made by the university’s Students Representative Council and Progressive Youth Alliance.
This is the logical progression in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. It's fitting that the vote took place in Durban, the scene of the anti-Semitic 2001 Durban Conference that created the BDS movement. While expulsion of Jews will not happen here, the BDS movement is moving towards a de facto bar on Jews who are not anti-Israel by alleging that taking subsidized trips to Israel or attending conferences and training through major pro-Israel Jewish organizations constitutes a conflict of interest. That standard would exclude a high percentage of pro-Israel Jewish students from participating in student government (not to mention excluding many leading non-Jewish pro-Israel students).

Posted by Amy Miller on February 12, 2015 18 Comments
Last week, we covered IRS Commissioner John Koskinen's testimony about the shocking tax consequences of Obama's executive amnesty plan. In previous testimony before Congress, Koskinen explained that illegal immigrants who were granted amnesty would be eligible to receive back-refunds in the form of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)---but only if they had registered with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN.) This means that, although the person was here illegally, they were still working and paying taxes and thus eligible for a refund. It's a bogus loophole, but it stems from an existing IRS interpretation of their own rules, so at the end of the day it was a "fix this now" situation rather than an "end of the world" scenario." That was scandal enough, though, considering the divisive nature of illegal immigration itself; but this week's testimony from Koskinen just made things a whole lot worse. That's right---we've had a "clarification." From the Washington Times:
On Wednesday, he said even illegal immigrants who didn’t pay taxes will be able to apply for back-credits once they get Social Security numbers. The EITC is a refundable tax credit, which means those who don’t have any tax liability can still get money back from the government. “Under the new program, if you get a Social Security number and you work, you’ll be eligible to apply for the Earned Income Tax Credit,” Mr. Koskinen said. He said that would apply even “if you did not file” taxes, as long as the illegal immigrant could demonstrate having worked off-the-books during those years. That expands the universe of people eligible for the tax credit by millions. He said only about 700,000 illegal immigrants currently work and pay taxes using an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number, but as many as 4 million illegal immigrants could get a stay of deportation and work permits under the temporary amnesty, which would mean they would be eligible to claim back-refunds if they worked those years.

Posted by Leslie Eastman on February 12, 2015 7 Comments
A while back I noted that Egypt looked like it was networking with European powers to address the chaos that threatens the vital Suez Canal. Russia's President Vladimir Putin came to Cairo this week, bearing gifts that indicate he understands Egyptian needs.
Just hours before a summit in Minsk that could decide the fate of eastern Europe for a generation, Vladimir Putin had a gift for the president of Egypt: an assault rifle. A photo of the rifle, with its wooden stock and accompanying gun case, along with a smiling President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi, was posted on the website of Egypt’s state-controlled MENA news agency. The rifle was identified as an AK-47, according to the state-run Russia Today’s Arabic website.
A video of the exchange, which occurred at the Cairo Aiport shortly after Putin arrived. But the AK-47 isn't the only present in Putin's bag: Last year, the two countries made a $3 billion deal that includes Russian attack helicopters and MiG-29 fighter jets. Additionally, Russian businesses have agreed to proceed with a major grain storage construction project in Egypt.

Posted by Mike LaChance on February 12, 2015 87 Comments
The same mainstream media that refused to demand Obama's (still undisclosed) Columbia University records in 2008 (while reassuring us that he was brilliant) has taken a keen interest in the academic pedigree of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Professor Jacobson repeatedly reminds us that the MSM always tries to kill Republican candidacies in the cradle. The Washington Post did it with Rick Perry's hunting property rock. Jeb Bush's high school antics are fair game, as were Mitt Romney's. Now they're trying to play the same game with Scott Walker's unfinished college degree. David A. Fahrenthold of the Washington Post wrote this yesterday:
As Scott Walker mulls White House bid, questions linger over college exit Scott Walker was gone. Dropped out. And in the spring of his senior year. In 1990, that news stunned his friends at Marquette University. Walker, the campus’s suit-wearing, Reagan-loving politico — who enjoyed the place so much that he had run for student body president — had left without graduating. To most of the Class of 1990 — and, later, to Wisconsin’s political establishment — Walker’s decision to quit college has been a lingering mystery. Not even his friends at Marquette were entirely sure why he never finished. Some had heard that a parent had fallen ill, or maybe there was some financial strain. Others thought he had simply had enough of school. Walker clearly liked college politics more than college itself. He had managed to line up 47 campaign endorsements, including ones from the ski team and the varsity chorus, but he had trouble showing up on time for French. And, after four years, he had faltered on both fronts. He’d lost an ugly race for president. And he apparently had far too few credits to graduate.
Allahpundit of Hot Air notes that journalists are already playing the requisite "gotcha" games with Scott Walker from which Democrats are always exempt.

Posted by Amy Miller on February 12, 2015 16 Comments
Remember that one time when a professional journalist called the United States Attorney General a duck, and then asked him to quack? In public? While the camera was rolling? There are no more words. Just watch: I'M SO UNCOMFORTABLE.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 11, 2015 30 Comments
On the O'Reilly show tonight, it was announced that the Southern Poverty Law Center has taken Dr. Ben Carson off the "Extremist" Watch List. And sure enough, Carson no longer is on the List. Carson's former Extremist profile now redirects to a page with this statement:
In October 2014, we posted an “Extremist File” of Dr. Ben Carson. This week, as we've come under intense criticism for doing so, we've reviewed our profile and have concluded that it did not meet our standards, so we have taken it down and apologize to Dr. Carson for having posted it.
http://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/downloads/publication/splc_statement_carson_feb2015.pdf Legal Insurrection first brought this travesty to public attention last Friday. Whether you agree with Carson or not, he didn't deserve to be on a list with Klan and Neo-Nazi leaders (there are a few other people who don't deserve to be on the list, but that's a different matter.) Since our report, the issue has been the subject of hundreds of columns, radio shows, and obviously SPLC, worth $300,000,000, felt the heat. Who says a small blog can't make a difference. Should I do it? Should I? Okay, here goes: (WARNING, MAY CAUSE SEIZURES)

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 11, 2015 19 Comments
I'm a believer, a true believer, that Elizabeth Warren would crush Hillary, if she wanted to. Just Run, Elizabeth, Run! Now a poll backs me up, Shock poll: Warren leads Clinton in Iowa, N.H.:
Populist groups cheering "Run Warren Run," today released 2016 election polls from Iowa and New Hampshire showing Sen. Elizabeth Warren ahead of dominant Democrat Hillary Clinton. The YouGov poll of likely Democratic voters for MoveOn.org and Democracy for America also found that 79 percent want Warren and majorities support her anti-Wall Street positions. The poll of 400 conducted Jan. 30 to Feb. 5 put Warren ahead of Clinton in Iowa, 31 percent to 24 percent. In New Hampshire, her lead is 30 percent to 27 percent.
SCIENCE! Why do some people hate SCIENCE?

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on February 11, 2015 40 Comments
This story hits a little too close to home. Yesterday, Republican state Rep. David Moore introduced House Bill 365 in the House Judiciary Committee. The bill would redefine "provocative clothing" in such a way that the wearing of yoga pants in public would be outlawed. According to the Billings Gazette:
A Montana legislative panel has moved to kill a bill that would tighten the state's indecent exposure law and consequently ban some provocative clothing. Members of the House Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to table House Bill 365 Wednesday. Republican Rep. David Moore introduced it on Tuesday. The proposal would have expanded the definition of indecent exposure to include garments that give the appearance of a person's buttocks, genitals, pelvis or female nipple. Moore said the bill could outlaw some provocative clothing, and later said he thinks yoga pants should be illegal in public.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on February 11, 2015 13 Comments
Senate Democrats continue to block the Department of Homeland Security funding bill passed by the House. As we've reported, the House DHS appropriations bill is enforcement-heavy and seeks to squash President Obama's executive overreach. Not amused, Speaker Boehner held a press conference and minced no words:
“The House did its job. We won the fight to fund the Department of Homeland Security and to stop the President’s unconstitutional actions. Now, it’s time for the Senate to do their work. You know, in the gift shop out here [in the Capitol], they’ve got these little booklets on how a bill becomes a law. Alright? The House has done its job. Why don’t you go ask the Senate Democrats when they’re going to get off their ass and do something other than to vote ‘no.’”

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 11, 2015 4 Comments
When the University of California system-wide student government passed a resolution not only divesting from Israel, but also the United States, it was met with widespread mockery and ridicule. The Stanford University Undergraduate Student Senate avoided that fate by failing to pass an Anti-Israel Resolution heavily promoted, including by dozens of Stanford pro-BDS professors to influence the outcome. As now seems to be a common tactic, the #BlackLivesMatters leadership was recruited to help with the effort. There was a Petition and some very good dissections of the Resolution by opposition students. One analysis indicated it wasn't even clear that Stanford invested in the companies from which divestment was sought, The Hidden Agenda Behind SOOP’s False Divestment Claims. The vote was close -- the boycotters needed a 2/3 majority, but fell just short. But a fail is a fail, and this at least gives pro-Israel, pro-peace students some time to regroup and reconsider how to fight this scourge. Multiple student Senate members who voted for divestment claimed in speeches that they did it for love of Israel, as if it was their job to know better what is good for Israelis than Israelis. When the vote was announced, there was a chorus of cheers, followed by someone (not sure if faculty, administrator or student) asking people to just get along, followed by shouts from an angry member of the crowd:
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH