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 Amy Miller on September 04, 2014 11 Comments
Rasmussen released a poll this week revealing that only 25% of likely voters believe that America is heading in the right direction. Just one year ago, this viewpoint was expressed by 30% of likely voters. Via Rasmussen:
This is up two points from the week before which tied the lowest level of confidence since last October during the temporary government shutdown. The number who say the country is heading in the right direction has been below 30% for most of this year. Early last October during the shutdown, confidence in the country’s course fell to 13%, the lowest finding in five years. Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters now think the country is headed down the wrong track. This finding is down three points from 69% a week ago, the highest negative finding since last November. Eighty percent (80%) felt the country was on the wrong track in early October 2013.
Notably, 70% of likely voters not affiliated with either the Republican or Democratic Party believe that the country is on the wrong track---which exceeds the average by 4 points. This latest poll comes at a time when President Obama's approval rating is hovering above his all-time low of 38%. With just 41% of Americans willing to admit they approve of the way the President is doing his job (down 2 points since August 24,) Republicans are finding themselves with a key strategic advantage as we move into the last 60 days before the November elections. gallup approval sept 3

LATEST NEWS

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on September 03, 2014 12 Comments
Advocating for foreign intervention is not something you usually hear from libertarian poster children like Senator Paul. And yet, that seems to be what he's preaching. From WaPo:
"If I were president, I would call a joint session of Congress," Paul told the AP. "I would lay out the reasoning of why ISIS is a threat to our national security and seek congressional authorization to destroy ISIS militarily."
Good. Someone should have a plan to deal with those monsters. But as WaPo points out, Paul is supposed to be the only non-interventionist in the bunch of potential 2016 contenders. Compare Paul's statement to the rest of the pack of GOP potential candidates, as compiled by WaPo:
Chris Christie: ""The ISIS situation is one that deserves a really detailed answer, which I'm not going to give you while walking down the boardwalk and taking selfies." Marco Rubio: "If we do not act now to assist our Iraqi partners and moderate Syrians who oppose ISIL, as well as utilize our own forces to directly target ISIL’s leadership, the result will be more suffering and tragedy for our people.”

Posted by Amy Miller on September 03, 2014 41 Comments
A federal judge has rejected the reigning judicial trend and held that Louisiana has the right to define marriage as one man, one woman. This is the first time since the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act in 2013 that a federal judge has upheld a state-level ban. From the opinion, via the Washington Post:
“It would no doubt be celebrated to be in the company of the near-unanimity of the many other federal courts that have spoken to this pressing issue, if this court were confident in the belief that those cases provide a correct guide,” Feldman wrote. “Clearly, many other courts will have an opportunity to take up the issue of same-sex marriage; courts of appeals and, at some point, the U.S. Supreme Court. The decision of this court is but one studied decision among many.”
You can read the full opinion here. In his opinion, U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman makes the point that most legal scholars have been---until now---unwilling to make: that the Supreme Court has never held that sexual orientation constitutes a protected class. Because of this inconvenient technicality, proper brief writing challenging same sex marriage bans should focus on whether or not the ban came about as a result of some sort of animosity toward gay people. This, of course, was not sufficiently proven:

Posted by Leslie Eastman on September 03, 2014 29 Comments
Professor Jacobson just noted that voter intensity is likely to be a critical factor in the 2014 elections this November. However, I assert that a petition drive being held in San Diego, focused on revoking the City Council's minimum wage mandate, shows that voters are quite intense right now.   Given the complete collapse of effective national policy on either foreign or domestic matters, I believe the drama that is occurring shows that citizens are desperate for some control over the increasing chaos in their lives. Following the questionable lead of progressive cities like Los Angeles, earlier this summer the City Council voted to increase the minimum wage to $9.75 in January, $10.50 in January 2016 and $11.50 in January 2017.  Our newly elected mayor, Kevin Faulconer, vetoed it; however, this veto was over-ridden on August 18. At that point, fresh from the success of the petition drives organized to remove our previous mayor, Bob Filner (facing numerous sexual harassment charges), members of the San Diego community organized.

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

Arkansas Students Outperform National Average After Universal Expansion of School Choice

Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy Holds Special Graduation Ceremony for Black Students

MI Senate Candidate Abdul El-Sayed Wants Medicare for All But His Psychiatrist Wife Doesn't Accept it

Arkansas Teacher Fired Over Anti-Charlie Kirk Comments Sues for 1st Amendment Violations

Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences to Begin Laying Off Some Staff

English Course at Bryn Mawr Will Examine Renaissance Texts Through ‘Trans Studies’

SEE MORE

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 03, 2014 27 Comments
She's a football flip-flopper, professing love for the Cowboys only when convenient, via Houston Chronicle:
The Abbott camp highlighted this KTCK-AM radio interview in which Davis said she grew up cheering for the Cowboys and will be doing so again this year: It contrasted that statement with Vogue interview in which Davis’ daughter described her as a Patriots fan and a shot of a “Go Pats!” comment on Facebook by Davis.
Elsewhere Davis actually continues to struggle:

Posted by Amy Miller on September 03, 2014 23 Comments
The White House has agreed to send 350 additional troops to Baghdad following a State Department request for more protection at the U.S. embassy and other installations. Via Time:
“This action was taken at the recommendation of the Department of Defense after an extensive interagency review, and is part of the President’s commitment to protect our personnel and facilities in Iraq as we continue to support the Government of Iraq in its fight against [ISIS],” [White House press secretary Josh] Earnest said. “These additional forces will not serve in a combat role.” ... “The President has made clear his commitment to doing whatever is required to provide the necessary security for U.S. personnel and facilities around the world,” Earnest said. “The request he approved today will allow some previously deployed military personnel to depart Iraq, while at the same time providing a more robust, sustainable security force for our personnel and facilities in Baghdad.”
According to CBS News, this will bring the U.S. troop count sent to Iraq to deal with the current crisis to 800, and the total U.S. troop presence in Baghdad to 1,213.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 02, 2014 12 Comments
I have noted before the disturbing trend of anti-Israel Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) supporters blaming Israel and/or Zionism for the recent outbursts of anti-Semitism around the world. I first noted the issue in connection with a tweet from Professor Steven Salaita, where he tweeted that "By eagerly conflating Jewishness and Israel, Zionists are partly responsible when people say antisemitic shit in response to Israeli terror." [Salaita's tweets became a big issue, although that tweet has not receive a lot of attention.] In that post, I noted that Salaita was far from alone. There has been a trend to use the "Zionism causes anti-Semitism" verbiage as a way of deflecting the grossly anti-Semitic BDS-led protests seen around the world under the guise of protesting the Gaza conflict. Fast forward to last week at Cornell, when Students for Justice in Palestine held what was to be a mobilization rally on campus related to Gaza. Casey Breznick is Editor-in-Chief of the conservative Cornell Review undergraduate journal. Casey also writes for Legal Insurrection (posts here) and College Insurrection (posts here), sustaining our long history of providing conservative Cornell undergraduates with a platform.

Posted by New Neo on September 02, 2014 19 Comments
Lee Harris's book Civilization and its Enemies: The Next Stage of History first came out in 2004. 2004 seems like a long time ago. And in a sense it is: ten years. But Harris's book has only grown more topical every day. That's unfortunate, because it's not a book that offers a lot of comfort. But his writing is insightful, so thoughtful and yet compressed that it's one of those books where the reader would do well to pause every paragraph or so in order to contemplate and digest what has just been said. Here's an excerpt. In the passage that follows, Harris has previously defined his use of the word "ruthlessness" as meaning "dreadfulness, frightfulness, horror, horribleness, terror, terribleness, atrociousness, atrocity":
...[T]he more the spirit of commerce triumphs, the closer mankind comes to dispensing with war, the nearer we approach the end of history, the greater are the rewards to those who decide to return to the path of war, and the easier it will be for them to conquer. There is nothing that can be done to change this fact; it is built into the structure of the world... People who have been trained in the practice of civility, and who find it second nature, will be reluctant to challenge the conduct of another on the ground that he is lacking civility The ruthless party therefore knows that he will be able to push very far before a break point is openly acknowledged Because once the break point is acknowledged, all bets are off and you no longer can be sure of the next step.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 02, 2014 26 Comments
We have written many times about the secretive John Doe proceedings in which Wisconsin prosecutors seized a wide-range of records from numerous conservative activists on the theory that it was a crime for such activists to coordinate issue advocacy with the campaign of Governor Scott Walker. In a federal lawsuit brought by two of the targets, Eric O'Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth (the "Club"), a federal district court judge enjoined the John Doe investigation finding, among other things, that the investigation violated the targets' constitutional free speech rights.  The court also found that the prosecutors advanced an invalid theory of criminal liability, since such coordination did not violate campaign finance laws. A state court judge earlier had made a similar finding. The John Doe investigators, who are defendants in the federal lawsuit, have appealed to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. O'Keefe and the Club filed their responsive appeals brief today. A copy is embedded at the bottom of this post. The brief is deep into the law, but it's the factual recitation which is riveting, detailing a prosecutorial conspiracy to sway the political process against conservatives and to undermine Walker. Here is the full Summary of Argument:
In February 2012, at the outset of a tough reelection campaign and battle for control of Congress, President Barack Obama's official campaign committee threw its support behind Priorities USA Action, a "super PAC" supporting Democratic candidates. "[T]op campaign staff and even some Cabinet members [would] appear at super PAC events," and they helped Priorities USA Action raise millions that it spent in support of Democratic candidates.[fn] Defendants launched and aggressively pursued a secret criminal investigation targeting every major right-of-center advocacy group in Wisconsin on the view that this kind of "coordination" between a candidate and supporters of his policies is illegal. They also claim the power to restrict speech on public policy issues based on an advocacy group's communications with a candidate, whether or not that speech has anything to do with that candidate's own campaign or election.

Posted by Amy Miller on September 02, 2014 3 Comments
Fox News reports that the United States has executed a series of drone strikes against al-Shabaab strongholds in Somalia. The Pentagon is still reportedly assessing the success of the strike, which was aimed at al-Shabaab leadership:
A senior Somali official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Associated Press that a U.S. drone targeted al-Shabaab leader Ahmed Abdi Godane as he left a meeting of the group's top leaders. The official told AP that intelligence indicated Godane "might have been killed along with other militants." The official said that the strike took place in a forest near Sablale district, 105 miles south of Mogadishu, where the group trains its fighters. The governor of Somalia's Lower Shabelle region, Abdiqadir Mohamed Nor, told The Associated Press that as government and African Union forces were heading to a town in Sablale district, they heard something that sounded like an "earthquake" as drones struck al-Shabaab bases. ... The U.S. action comes after Somalia's government forces regained control of a high security prison in the capital that was attacked Sunday by seven heavily armed suspected Islamic militants who attempted to free other extremists held there. The Pentagon statement did not indicate whether the U.S. action was related to the prison attack.
Al-Shabaab claims responsibility for an attack on a Mogadishu prison that occurred just prior to the American drone strikes. The prison, which serves as an interrogation center for the Somali government, is believed to be home to captured extremists. The Pentagon would not confirm that the U.S. took action in response to this attack.

Posted by Amy Miller on September 02, 2014 32 Comments
Fast food workers are planning to take their protests to a new level Thursday as they take to the streets for the largest mass strike to date. According to the New York Times, these protests will be different from previous protests in two ways. First, organizers are expanding their demonstrations' locations, and participants. This time, protesters from both the fast food and health service industries will go on strike in 100 cities, and hold sit ins in over a dozen. Second, organizers plan to engage in and encourage civil disobedience as a way of getting the message out:
At a convention that was held outside Chicago in July, 1,300 fast-food workers unanimously approved a resolution calling for civil disobedience as a way to step up pressure on the fast-food chains. “They’re going to use nonviolent civil disobedience as a way to call attention to what they’re facing,” said Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union, which has spent millions of dollars helping to underwrite the campaign. “They’re invoking civil rights history to make the case that these jobs ought to be paid $15 and the companies ought to recognize a union.”
The SEIU is encouraging members of its health service union members to join protests in 6 of the 100 cities, hoping that diversifying participation will draw greater attention to the strikes. These strikes are the result of a two year effort to force fast food chains to raise their minimum wage to $15 per hour, and to allow their employees to unionize. Earlier this summer the NLRB ruled to break through McDonald's corporate-franchisee relationship in an attempt to conduct mass unionizations of entire chains all at once, as opposed to working through a company franchise by franchise. If that ruling is upheld by the courts, McDonald's could be held liable for labor law violations at its thousands of locations. CNN Money reports data suggesting that fast-food CEOs currently make 1,000 times more than the average worker in the industry, and that around 33% of fast food workers have spent at least some time in college. Additionally, 70% of fast food workers are over the age of 20, making it easy for organizers to quickly debunk arguments that "fast food jobs are for teenagers." Whether or not that data holds true in the long run, union representatives are ready to emphasize the disparity between individual employee salaries and overall corporate profits as a way to whip up support.

Posted by Mike LaChance on September 02, 2014 7 Comments
It's amazing what you can miss if you don't attend fundraisers for the Democratic Party. Daniel Halper of the Weekly Standard tells a fascinating story about Obama at such an event in Rhode Island this weekend:
Obama: Bush-Cheney 'Security Apparatus' Makes Us 'Pretty Safe' President Barack Obama said last night at a Democratic fundraiser in Rhode Island that the terrorism from ISIS "doesn’t immediately threaten the homeland." The reason? The security measures taken by President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, according to Obama. First the president said the situation in the Middle East is "scary," according to a transcript of the event released by the White House. "I don’t have to tell you, anybody who has been watching TV this summer, it seems like it is just wave after wave ofupheaval, most of it surrounding the Middle East. You’re seeing a change in the order in the Middle East. But the old order is having a tough time holding together and the new order has yet to be born, and in the interim, it’s scary."
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH