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 Casey Breznick on June 19, 2014 1 Comment
A poll released this week suggests that a majority of Cuban-Americans living in Miami favor ending the Cuban trade embargo. A finer reading calls those results into question. The poll, conducted by Florida International University (FIU) professors Guillermo J. Grenier and Hugh Gladwin for the Cuban Research Initiative, finds that 52% of all Cuban-Americans and 51% of Cuban-Americans registered to vote favor ending the 54-year long embargo that restricts all imports of Cuban goods and most exports to the communist island. 2014 FIU Cuba Polll Favor Embargo section Though, since the study has a margin of error of 3.12 points, a 52-to-48 spread is a virtual tie. Professors Grenier and Gladwin have conducted the FIU Cuba Poll every year since 1991. Its respondents are 1,000 randomly selected Cuban-Americans above age 18 living throughout Miami-Dade County.

LATEST NEWS

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 19, 2014 20 Comments
Some privileges are permissible topics for discussion on campus and in the media. For example, White Privilege is the obsession of some faculty and students. George Will pointed out that there is another privilege on campuses -- false or contrived claims of victim status.  Will did not argue that real victims, be it of actual racism or sexual assault, share some special privilege, but rather, that there are people who contrive or encourage others to falsely create victimhood where none exists. We see it in theories such as microaggression, where in the absence of proof of actual racism, critical race theorists find racism in routine everyday interactions where the participants do not even realize they are being "racist," much less have any racist intent. We see it in repeated instances of fake, self-inflicted "hate crimes" in which the victim is, in fact, the perpetrator. We also see it in the lowering of the standards of proof and definitions of what constitutes sexual assault. I think everyone agrees that sexual assault as used in the criminal law deserves condemnation and punishment. But colleges, under pressure from the Justice Department and supposedly feminist groups, have started using definitions of sexual assault that can reach absurd results.

Posted by A.F. Branco on June 19, 2014 1 Comment

Note: You may reprint this cartoon provided you link back to this source.  To see more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here. Branco’s page is Cartoonist A.F.Branco...

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 19, 2014 10 Comments

what this window sticker means. Spotted it in the parking garage at Syracuse Airport on my return yesterday from Los Angeles....

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

LA United School District Engulfed in $22 Million Fraud Scandal

Student Leader at CSU-Fresno Speaks Out Against Petitioners on Campus

Student Newspaper at Chicago School Launches ‘ICE Tracker’ After Illegal Charged With Murdering Student

Fraternity Leader at Northern Arizona U. Charged With Hazing in Alcohol Related Death of Student

Oklahoma Senate Passes Bill to Strengthen Free Speech on Campuses

UW-Madison Criticizes Student Govt. for Passing Anti-Israel BDS Resolution

SEE MORE

Posted by Mandy Nagy on June 18, 2014 12 Comments
Hillary Clinton joined FOX News' Bret Baier and Greta Van Susteren Tuesday evening for a much anticipated interview, where the former Secretary of State answered questions on a number of topics - Benghazi, the controversial swap of Sgt. Bergdahl for the Taliban five, the IRS scandal, and a wide range of other issues. Clinton is out with a new book, "Hard Choices," and she indicated on numerous occasions as she answered some of the questions, "I write about this in my book." That said, I'm not sure there was much to come out of the FOX interview that couldn't be found in the pages of Clinton's book. As is often the case with most interviews with any subject, there seemed to be a few missed opportunities for further pressing on some of her answers, as several noted in comments on Twitter. There were a couple instances however where Bair or Van Susteren tried to politely prod Clinton to expand upon an answer. Here was one exchange between Van Susteren and Clinton on the topic of the Bergdahl swap.

GRETA: Afghanistan. Would you have made that swap for Sgt. Bergdahl? Five Taliban for Sgt. Bergdahl? CLINTON: Well, as I write in the book, and at the time, I was trying to put together a bigger deal, a deal that would create a negotiation between the government of Afghanistan and the Taliban to try to move the Taliban to renounce violence, renounce al Qaeda, and agree to support the constitution and the laws. GRETA: Isn't that part of their ideology though, violence? I mean look at the violence towards women. Aren't we abandoning the women to the Taliban?

Posted by David Gerstman on June 18, 2014 6 Comments
Last Thursday night, three Israeli teenagers Eyal Yifrach, Gil-ad Schaar and Naftali Fraenkel were abducted setting off a massive manhunt for the three and their captors. Israel has mobilized its reserve units to assist in the search. Palestinian society is showing support ... for the kidnappers. The Jerusalem Post reports:
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Wednesday praised the Israeli security services for their overnight roundup of dozens of Palestinians, including 50 Hamas operatives, in the West Bank search for three kidnapped Jewish teens. The IDF arrested 64 Palestinians in overnight raids across the West Bank on Wednesday, including 50 former Hamas prisoners who had been released by Israel in the Schalit exchange in 2011.
Another article at the Post says that if any of these suspects is found to have violated the terms of their release, he will be sent back for the "remainder of [his] original sentence." A Hamas leader hails the kidnapping as a "heroic capture operation."

Posted by William A. Jacobson on June 18, 2014 49 Comments
From WaPo:
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has canceled the Washington Redskins trademark registration, calling the football team’s name “disparaging to Native Americans.” The landmark case, which appeared before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, was filed on behalf of five Native Americans. It was the second time such a case was filed. “This victory was a long time coming and reflects the hard work of many attorneys at our firm,” said lead attorney Jesse Witten, of Drinker Biddle & Reath. Federal trademark law does not permit registration of trademarks that “may disparage” individuals or groups or “bring them into contempt or disrepute.” The ruling pertains to six different trademarks associated with the team, each containing the word “Redskin.”

Posted by Bruce Carroll on June 17, 2014 42 Comments
The Washington Post's Dana Milbank, who has an increasing reputation as a shill for the left wing, viciously attacked the Heritage Foundation in a column on Monday evening. The column, "Heritage's ugly Benghazi panel" characterized the event as though it were a full-throated, Muslim-bashing hate-crime cleverly disguised as a public forum to discuss the Benghazi attack.
What began as a session purportedly about “unanswered questions” surrounding the September 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Libya deteriorated into the ugly taunting of a woman in the room who wore an Islamic head covering. [...]  Then Saba Ahmed, an American University law student, stood in the back of the room and asked a question in a soft voice. “We portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there’s 1.8 billion followers of Islam,” she told them. “We have 8 million-plus Muslim Americans in this country and I don’t see them represented here.” Panelist Brigitte Gabriel of a group called ACT! for America pounced. She said “180 million to 300 million” Muslims are “dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization.” She told Ahmed that the “peaceful majority were irrelevant” in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and she drew a Hitler comparison: “Most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda and as a result, 60 million died.” “Are you an American?” Gabriel demanded of Ahmed, after accusing her of taking “the limelight” and before informing her that her “political correctness” belongs “in the garbage.” “Where are the others speaking out?” Ahmed was asked. This drew an extended standing ovation from the nearly 150 people in the room, complete with cheers. The panel’s moderator, conservative radio host Chris Plante, grinned and joined in the assault. “Can you tell me who the head of the Muslim peace movement is?” he demanded of Ahmed. “Yeah,” audience members taunted, “yeah.” Ahmed answered quietly, as before. “I guess it’s me right now,” she said.
Milbank's account seemed to suggest an anti-Muslim witch hunt with one lone innocent standing at the back braving the torrent of hate. Except it wasn't true. Milbank's story was immediately challenged by those who know him best -- fellow political reporters in Washington, DC. Mollie Hemingway dissects Milbank's account versus the video excerpts first released by, ironically, Media Matters for America -- the famed leftist attack "media watchdog" group.

Posted by Bruce Carroll on June 17, 2014 23 Comments
News broke this morning that U.S. Special Forces over the weekend captured the key terrorist figure in the September 11, 2012 attack at the U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya.
Abu Khattalah will be brought to the United States to face charges "in the coming days," said Edward Price, a spokesman for the National Security Council. Abu Khattalah, who faces three federal criminal charges, will be tried in U.S. courts, said Attorney General Eric Holder. U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other U.S. citizens died in the September 11, 2012, attack, which became a political flashpoint. "We retain the option of adding additional charges in the coming days," Holder said. "Even as we begin the process of putting Khatallah on trial and seeking his conviction before a jury, our investigation will remain ongoing as we work to identify and arrest any co-conspirators."
U.S. officials say that Abu Khattalah is being held in a location outside Libya -- perhaps on a naval vessel. Khatallah had been a key suspect from the start of the post-Benghazi investigation. It also appeared he was never worried about being captured by the U.S. government. Just weeks after the assault on the compound, Khatallah was seen sipping a strawberry frappe on the patio of a Benghazi hotel, according to The New York Times.

Posted by Jack Park on June 17, 2014 8 Comments
On its face, Monday’s unanimous decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in SBA List v. Driehaus is about when a claim of future injury is sufficiently well-grounded to allow someone to file a lawsuit to stop it. But, the decision is really about the regulation of political speech. In their incisive and hilarious friend of the court brief, the Cato Institute and P. J. O’Rourke noted, “The campaign promise (and its subsequent violation), as well as disparaging statements about one’s opponent (whether true, mostly true, mostly not true, or entirely fantastic) are cornerstones of American democracy.” Ohio (and others, including some in Congress) thinks that’s a problem. In the 2010 congressional cycle, the Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List) wanted to put up a billboard stating, “Shame on Steve Driehaus! Driehaus voted FOR taxpayer-funded abortion.” That billboard didn’t go up because its target, then-U.S. Representative Steve Driehaus threatened legal action. Driehaus also filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission asserting that SBA List’s billboard violated Ohio law because it was “false.” The Commission found probable cause to think Driehaus was right and scheduled a hearing. That probable cause determination turned Driehaus loose to pursue discovery, which he did intrusively, noticing depositions of SBA List employees and others and asking for not just evidence supporting SBA List’s interpretation of the Affordable Care act but also for its “communications with allied organizations, political party committees, and Members of Congress and their staffs.” SBA List filed suit to challenge the constitutionality of Ohio’s false statement laws. The election intervened, however, and Driehaus dismissed his complaint after he was defeated. The district court then dismissed SBA List’s lawsuit because it was no longer ripe, and the Sixth Circuit affirmed that ruling. The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Sixth Circuit, allowing SBA List and others to challenge the restrictions on their political speech.
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH