Image 01 Image 03

Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

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

Workers of the South, unite:
The workers at the VW plant in Chattanooga voted 712-626 to stay out of the union after a lobbying fight in which Republican politicians warned unionization could lead Volkswagen and automobile companies to leave the state. Union officials...blamed politicians who had warned workers that by joining they union, they could hurt their own economic interests. ...UAW officials vowed they would not give up in their effort to organize workers in the South, a region that historically has been much more difficult to unionize.
Give up? Never. They are patient.

LATEST NEWS

From Danelle: When one bumper sticker covers everything​! Found this one today at an archery match in Ft Stockton, Texas....

Moments ago the jury returned a guilty verdict on many of the  charges brought against Michael Dunn in his 'loud music" murder trial.  Dunn was tried in the shooting death of 17-year-old Jordan Davis.

REACTIONS:

Davis family made brief comments to press, happy some closure, that Dunn will see serious jail time, that young people shouldn't have to fear can just be gunned down for loud music. State Attorney Angela Corey absolutely determined to re-try Dunn on the hung first degree murder charge.

Demos, a left-wing Soros-Open Society affiliated UK think tank, did a study of "slurs" on Twitter. The Daily Mail Reports, Just how racist is Twitter?
10,000 racist tweets are sent ever day, a major new study into racism on social networks has discovered. Research by the think tank Demos found the biggest insult was 'white boy' Researchers analysed 126,975 English-language tweets from across the globe over a 9-day period in the biggest ever study of Twitter racism. Researchers revealed the most common racial slurs used on the micro-blogging site included ‘whitey’ and ‘pikey’. However, as many as 70% of tweets using such language were deemed to be using slurs in non-derogatory fashion. 'This sparks the debate about the extent to which Twitter truly is a platform for racism and abusive language,' the report claims. Jamie Bartlett, Director of CASM at Demos and author of the report, said: 'Twitter provides us with a remarkable window into how people talk, argue, debate, and discuss issues of the day. 'While there are a lot of racial slurs being used on Twitter, the overwhelming majority of them are not used in an obviously prejudicial or hateful way.
Here's the chart from the Demos Report (the percentages are of the total of tweets identified as containing slurs:

Prof. KC Johnson, best known for his investigative work regarding abysmal university and faculty handling of the Duke Lacrosse case, has a post at Minding the Campus regarding a disturbing appointment at Dartmouth, 'Why Have a Hearing? Just Expel Him':
"Why could we not expel a student based on an allegation?" That astonishing question was posed at a conference on how colleges respond to sexual assault issues by Amanda Childress, Sexual Assault Awareness Program coordinator at Dartmouth. According to Inside Higher Ed, Childress continued: "It seems to me that we value fair and equitable processes more than we value the safety of our students. And higher education is not a right. Safety is a right. Higher education is a privilege." Give Childress credit for candor--even the campus spokespersons for increasing the number of guilty findings in campus tribunals usually aren't so bald in their disdain for basic principles of due process. Childress' jarring remarks coincided with news that Dartmouth had promoted her, and given her additional power over the college's sexual assault policies. Last Friday, the college announced that Childress will head the newly-created Center for Community Action and Prevention, which Childress said would "be the focal point on campus for Dartmouth's sexual assault and violence prevention initiatives" and "drive the College's mobilization efforts around preventing sexual violence and increasing the safety and well-being of all members of our community." (All members, it seems, except students facing unsubstantiated allegations of sexual assault.) Incredibly, Dartmouth theater professor Paul Hackett suggested that despite Childress' appointment, the college isn't going far enough on the issue.

As of this writing, we still have no verdict in the Michael Dunn "Loud Music" murder trial. The jury now is in its 25th hour of deliberations, and has asked several questions about the law, including self defense. The verdict could come at any moment. It's interesting to watch the Twitter chatter as the verdict is unknown. as people can project their feelings without knowing the result. Race is a prism for many, who are outraged that the jury is taking so long. Here are just a few representative tweets:

Almost a year ago I reported on how the case if Teresa Wagner, a Conservative Iowa law professor denied new trial in political discrimination case:
The lawsuit by Teresa Wagner against the former Dean of the University of Iowa’s College of Law has received a lot of attention, a tortured procedural history (including a prior appeal) and confusing results. In the latest twist, a judge has denied Wagner’s motion for a new trial (full opinion embedded at bottom of post). The lawsuit concerns claims by Wagner that she suffered discrimination based on her conservative political views, resulting in her being denied a promotion (she’s still employed).
Paul Mirengoff of Power Line describes the outrageous facts behind the case:
Wagner was already the associate director of the law school’s writing center. Moreover, she had taught legal writing at George Mason University Law School, edited three books, practiced as a trial attorney in Iowa, and written several legal briefs, including one in a U.S. Supreme Court case. In addition, the faculty-appointments committee at the University of Iowa College of Law recommended her appointment as a full-time instructor.

Spotted by The Wife in Ithaca. (No, she did not key the car, but she thought about it.)...

The Times of Israel, based on communications with unnamed Palestinian Authority officials, reports that the Palestinians have conveyed their rejection of John Kerry's draft "framework" proposal:
The Palestinian Authority has informed US Secretary of State John Kerry that it will not accept his framework peace proposal as it currently stands, PA officials told The Times of Israel.... Central clauses of the framework deal as presented by Kerry, and rejected by the PA, the Palestinian officials said, are as follows: Borders: The peace agreement is to be based on pre-1967 lines, but will take into consideration changes on the ground in the decades since. Settlements: There will be no massive evacuation of “residents.” Refugees: Palestinian refugees will be able to return to Palestine or remain where they currently live. In addition, it is possible that a limited number of refugees could be allowed into pre-1967 Israel as a humanitarian gesture, and only with Israeli acquiescence. Nowhere is it written that Israel bears responsibility for suffering caused to the refugees. Capital: The Palestinian capital will be in Jerusalem. Security: Israel has the right to defend itself, by itself. The Jordan Valley: The IDF will retain a presence in the Jordan Valley. The length of time the IDF will remain will depend on the abilities of the Palestinian security forces. Border crossings: Israel will continue to control border crossings into Jordan. Definition of the countries: Two states will result, “a national state of the Jewish people and a national state of the Palestinian people.”
So what's the problem?  Some of these issues probably are surmountable. But one issue probably is not, the recognition of Israel as the Jewish homeland, as further reported by the Times:

Erick Erickson called Wendy Davis “Abortion Barbie” because of her cluelessness about the Gosnell shop of horrors at the same time she was fighting a proposed requirement that abortion clinics meet normal surgical center standards and abortion doctors have admitting privileges at local hostpitals. When Davis stepped back from that position the other day and declared that she could support a ban on late-term abortions if there were sufficient "deference" given to the doctor-patient relationship, I suggested the proper analogy was Gumby not Barbie because "infinitely flexible positions now are the hallmark of Wendy Davis’ campaign." For that change in position on late term abortion, Davis was accused of "betrayal" by abortion advocates. Davis, however, has changed her stance again, and now is back to opposing any ban on late-term abortions, because there is no amount of "deference" that could satisfy her, after all. Via San Antonio Express, Wendy Davis says it would be 'impossible' for Legislature to devise appropriate 20-week ban on abortion:

Previously we noted that the New York Times has a tendency to play up the successes of the BDS movement and to play down the true nature of the BDS movement. The New York Times has since carried two more articles about BDS; one in the news section and one op-ed. Surprisingly, the opinion article took a critical look at BDS. Unfortunately the news story was consistent with previous New York Times coverage of the issue. In the news section, Jerusalem bureau chief, Jodi Rudoren wrote West Bank Boycott: A Political Act or Prejudice? For the most part Rudoren treats the issue "evenhandedly," giving each side equal time and not judging either side. In the course of the reporting Rudoren interviews BDS activist Omar Barghouti.
“He can say anything he wishes, but immoral? Resistance to his immoral policies can never be immoral,” Mr. Barghouti said of Mr. Netanyahu. “The litmus test is are you boycotting a group of people based on their identity, or are you boycotting something — an act, a company, a business — that you disagree with. “We have three reasons,” Mr. Barghouti said, citing the movement’s goals of ending the occupation; ensuring equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel; and promoting the right of return for Palestinian refugees. “End the three reasons and we won’t boycott.”
Barghouti, who got a degree from Tel Aviv University is a pretty good example of equality of Israel's minorities. That degree also makes Barghouti a hypocrites as his boycott would affect Tel Aviv University too. Rudoren ignores these inconsistencies. She also remains silent about Barghouti's demand for the right of return. Everyone knows that the point of that "right" is the destruction of Israel. In fact, Barghouti's claim confirms that the  the goal of the BDS movement is an assault on Israel's right to exist is correct. Rudoren doesn't appear to grasp this. Oddly, it is columnist Roger Cohen who got things right about BDS. In The B.D.S. Threat, Cohen writes:

I generally dislike Olympic ceremonies because, staged on immense stadiums with numerous extras, they lend themselves easily to a totalitarian aesthetic.  The 1980 Olympic opening ceremony in Moscow was an exercise in totalitarianism: pyramids of humans erected on the stadium, extras marching lockstep, etc.  Likewise, the 2008 Beijing Olympics showcased loyal subjects moving around on cue. Russians learned their lessons and sought to wow foreigners in Sochi through high art and high tech.  Producer Andrei Boltenko was faced with the uneasy task of presenting the authoritarian extravaganza that is Russian history in some kind of truthful but positive light, and he did it through celebrating culture, not politics.  Cue the cuckoo clock speech. Russians opened up the program with a walk through the Cyrillic alphabet that highlighted Russia's contributions to civilization.  A quaint idea that a bunch of white men (save for Pushkin, and Russians don't dwell too much on him being part black), most of them dead, did something worth treasuring. I thought the list of great Russians was a bit heavy on emigres: Nabokov, Chagall, Kandinsky.  I'm not sure Kandinsky belongs to that short list anyway -- personal opinion, I know.  Considering that Russia nurtured so many chess champions, maybe the producers could had Kasparov stand for the letter K.  OK, never mind. In the best Soviet tradition, Russians couldn't help exaggerating.  For letter T, for instance, they had "television".  While the word is Russian in origin, Russians (and Russian emigres) only invented some of the technology that went into it.

In a decision issued earlier today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the California law conditioning the right of “responsible law-abiding” citizens to carry firearms in public for self-defense purposes on a showing of “good cause” unlawfully restricts Second Amendment rights. California prohibits the open carry of firearms and imposes limits on concealed carry. In particular, San Diego County requires applicants for concealed carry permits to produce supporting documentation to establish not just that the applicant is concerned for his or her own safety, but that the applicant can identify “circumstances that distinguish [him or her] from the mainstream.” As the Second Amendment states, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The Ninth Circuit explained, “[C]arrying weapons in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense is a central component of the right to bear arms.” Accordingly, it concluded, “[I]f self-defense outside the home is part of the core right to ‘bear arms’ and the California regulatory scheme prohibits the exercise of that right, no amount of interest balancing under a heightened form of means-ends scrutiny can justify San Diego’s policy.” The Ninth Circuit’s decision contributes to a split in the circuits that makes Supreme Court review likely. The Seventh Circuit is on the side on the Ninth, but the Second, Third, and Fourth go the other way. A petition for certiorari seeking review of the Third Circuit’s decision has been filed in the Supreme Court. In addition, a petition for certiorari that raises the question whether there is a Second Amendment right to bear arms in public has been distributed for the Supreme Court’s conference on February 21.

who like Obama using executive orders to go around Congress? "The Enablers"...