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 Mandy Nagy on February 22, 2014 3 Comments
Both opponents and supporters of President Nicolas Maduro took to the streets in Venezuela on Saturday to participate in competing rallies, after days of unrest. From the Associated Press via ABC News:
Venezuelans on both sides of the nation's political divide took to the streets on Saturday after nearly two weeks of mass protests that have President Nicolas Maduro scrambling to reassert his leadership of this economically stricken country.

In Caracas, tens of thousands of opponents of President Nicolas Maduro filled several city blocks in their biggest rally to date against Maduro's 10-month-old government. Across town, a mostly female crowd of government backers gathered in T-shirts and baseball caps, forming a sea of red — the color of Maduro's Socialist party.

The dueling protests capped a violent week in which a government crackdown jailed hard-line opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez and dozens of other activists. The violence also left at least nine people dead on both sides and injured at least 100 others.

Venezuelans woke up Saturday to smoldering barricades of trash and other debris in the streets of some major cities, but there were no reports of major violence. Protesters have called on Maduro to either resolve problems such as rising crime and galloping inflation or step aside.

Maduro meanwhile has been highly critical of the United States and media organizations over the course of the crisis. From AFP via Yahoo News:

LATEST NEWS

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 22, 2014 11 Comments
Update 2:35 p.m. Eastern -- Julia Tymoshenko addresses crowd in Kiev: Julia Tymoshenko addresses crowd 2-22-2014 The President of Ukraine has fled Kiev but it is unclear if he has resigned. (UPDATE: Refuses to resign, calls protests a facsist coup d'etat.) Kiev is in the hands of the opposition, and government security forces have vowed to stay neutral, reports Reuters:
Ukraine security chiefs signal allegiance to protesters The heads of four Ukrainian security bodies, including the police's Berkut anti-riot units, appeared in parliament on Saturday and declared they would not take part in any conflict with the people. They represented the paratroop unit of the military, the Berkut anti-riot police, Alfa special operations unit and military intelligence. The Interior Ministry had already signalled its allegiance to anti-government protests under a new minister from the ranks of the opposition.
The former Prime Minister and key opposition leader (background here) is to be freed from prison, via Sky News:
Jailed Ukrainian opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko is set for release as part of political decisions taken at an emergency session of parliament in Kiev. Initial reports claimed she had already been freed, but these were later clarified by aide Natasha Lysova who said the parliamentary decision meant she must be freed immediately. AFP news agency, quoting opposition MP Mykola Katerynchuk, reported President Viktor Yanukovich had promised to resign over the conflict.
In an ominous sign, reflecting that there are anti-Semitic elements in the opposition (as we previously noted), the Chief Rabbi of Ukraine has urged Jews to flee, as reported by Haaretz:

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

Teacher Unions Sounding Alarm Over New AI-Driven Classroom Model

Students Claim Required English Course at Texas A&M San Antonio Ties Standard English to ‘Oppression’

AAUP Backs Anti-ICE Campaign on College Campuses

California High School Drops Punishment of Student for Pro-ICE Flyers After Inquiry From FIRE

CUNY LGBTQ Center to Host Podcast Discussion About the ‘Trans Politics of Looting’

Northeastern University Students Anxious After String of Crimes Near Campus

SEE MORE

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 21, 2014 26 Comments
A whole lot of money is chasing the new cool kids, the newly name-branded "journalists" like Ezra Klein and Glenn Greenwald, who bring their friends along with them to the bottomless internet money pits. Eric Wemple at WaPo describes the superlative feeding frenzy growing the bubble in the trading of journalists, American journalism, brimming with once-in-a-generation talent:
Earlier this week First Look Media, the startup general news venture bankrolled by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar, announced the hiring of longtime Wall Street critic and Rolling Stone contributing editor Matt Taibbi. Such situations demand the use of the superlative, and First Look Media Executive Editor Eric Bates spilled forth, “Matt is one of the most influential journalists of our time.” First Look Media is driven by the compulsion to spurn the conventions of the mainstream media, and in announcing Taibbi’s accession, it succeeded. By a hair. Traditional news outlets have settled on a fairly standard mode of implausibly praising colleagues and soon-to-be colleagues.

Posted by Andrew Branca on February 21, 2014 51 Comments
E.J. Dionne, Jr., in his Washington Post piece entitled "Repeal stand-your-ground laws," presents us with yet another example of the utter inability of too many journalists to grasp the relatively simple and straightforward legal concept commonly referred to as "Stand-Your-Ground." Humorously, the first paragraph of his piece had me utterly convinced that Dionne must certainly be writing about Obamacare, despite the headline:
The law is supposed to solve problems, not create them. Laws should provide as much clarity as possible, not expand the realms of ambiguity and subjectivity. Laws ought to bring about the practical results their promoters claim they'll achieve.
With a lead-in like that, surely he's about to call for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, right? Just kidding--it is, after all, the Washington Post. Instead, Dionne has decided to call for the repeal of another law about which he patently knows nothing: "Stand-Your-Ground."

Dionne's Imagined Relevance of Stand-Your-Ground to Dunn Trial

How can we identify his ignorance of the law he argues should be repealed, as well as its application (or, more accurately, its lack of application) in the Zimmerman and Dunn trials. Why, he's kind enough to show us, in his own words. First, Dionne writes of the Dunn trial:
Supporters of the law say it was technically not at issue in the case, but this overlooks the obvious role it played in the trial.
And where do we find this "obvious role" for SYG in the Dunn trial? It was mentioned in a single passing sentence--that would be ONE sentence--with no particular emphasis by defense counsel Cory Strolla in his closing argument. One mention over the course of two weeks of jury voir dire opening statements, day after day of trial, and closing arguments. One. Mention.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 21, 2014 19 Comments
As reported by the Beckley, West Virginia Register-Herald, Joe Manchin said he would vote to repeal Obamacare. That quote (below) has received a lot of attention, but in context it's not at all clear that Manchin was doing anything other than playing both sides of the fence because he also said he supports fixing Obamacare (emphasis added):
Although Sen. Joe Manchin had planned to discuss the Charleston-area chemical spill and his recent piece of legislation the Chemical Safety and Drinking Water Protection Act of 2014, he instead turned his focus on a hodgepodge of topics, including minimum wage, balancing the nation’s budget and health-care issues.... He asked for all the listeners to let him and other lawmakers know their thoughts on the variety of topics, including the Affordable Care Act. “We spend more on health care than any state, but we rank 43rd on wellness and longevity.” Both parties agree on many aspects of the ACA, such as pre-existing conditions not being excluded from coverage and no lifetime caps, but there are still many kinks that need to be fixed, Manchin said. “I will vote tomorrow to repeal (the ACA), but I want to fix the problems in it.” He said the ACA is essentially a product and the government needs to find a way to “sell it” and make their customers want to buy it.
As Ed Morrissey points out, there isn't even a Senate bill coming to vote "tomorrow" (i.e., today), so it's not clear about what Manchin is talking. Manchin has warned before about a "complete meltdown" of Obamacare:
The West Virginia Democratic senator said Sunday that the federal health-care law could be headed for a "complete meltdown" if costs rise too fast and individuals are not happy with their coverage.
From this vague and unclear statement, it appears Manchin is doing nothing more than criticizing Obamacare in order to save it. Here's video from August 2013 in which Manchin argues to save Obamacare through changes:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 21, 2014 36 Comments
I saw the videotape below at Ace of Spades HQ, as well as at Hot Air, regarding a Detroit mother at home with her children when three men, at least one of whom was armed with a handgun, attempted to kick open the front back door. Fearing for her safety and that of her children, this mother used a rifle in self-defense. She didn't hit any of the intruders, but it was enough to scare them off initially, and again when one of them tried again to break in: Viewing the video, I wondered whether the rifle this mother used would be legal in New York State under the new SAFE Act, which was rushed through the NY State legislature on short notice after the Newtown, CT, school shooting. The SAFE Act was irrational in many respects, including a 7-round magazine limit that was unworkable and ultimately thrown out by the courts, a requirement that even 10-round magazines not be loaded with more than 7 bullets, and a definition of "Assault Weapon" that relied on physical characteristics that were cosmetic and common. The SAFE Act has led to a rebellion by upstate county legislatures, almost all of whom have voted to reject the SAFE Act. Even Martha Robertson, the liberal Emily's List-backed Democratic challenger in my home NY-23 congressional District, says she is against the SAFE Act. The criminalization of otherwise law-abiding people has led numerous Sheriffs and police unions to call for repeal, and to ignore violations for now. But the SAFE Act remains the law of NY. Would this Detroit mom who save herself and her family from the violence of the armed intruders herself be a criminal in NY because of her rifle? I didn't feel knowledgeable enough about weapons, so I turned to someone who does have that knowledge, Bob Owens, Editor of BearingArms.com. Bob explains in the text below, which he forwarded to me, that the rifle would be an illegal "Assault Weapon" under the SAFE Act, not available for new purchase and required to be registered by April 1 for those who owned it prior to the SAFE Act. In NY State, this mom would be a criminal because of cosmetic features of her rifle. Here is Bob's analysis:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 21, 2014 10 Comments
There are conflicting reports about an agreement reached between the government and opposition. Reuters reports as of 7:51 8:23 Eastern, Yanukovich announces early Ukraine poll but no deal yet with opposition:
Ukraine's President Viktor Yanukovich announced plans for early elections on Friday in a series of concessions to his pro-European opponents, but it was unclear whether they would accept an EU-mediated deal to end violence that has left dozens dead.... Yanukovich said Ukraine, which emerged from the wreckage of the Soviet Union in 1991, would revert to a previous constitution under which the president had less authority. "I am also starting the process of a return to the 2004 constitution with a rebalancing of powers towards a parliamentary republic," he said. "I call for the start of procedures for forming a government of national unity." Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, whose foreign minister is part of a European Union team trying to broker a compromise, said he could not be certain that the "worst-case scenario" could be avoided. "The threats are still there," he told a news conference in Warsaw. The EU mediators said the opposition was seeking last minute changes, but they still expected a deal to be signed on Friday. There were fist fights in parliament as the political tension mounted.
We will update as more in known. Update: Accord Is Signed in Ukraine but Doubts Are Strong:
The embattled president of Ukraine and leaders of the opposition signed a political deal on Friday aimed at ending a spiral of lethal violence with early elections and a reduction in presidential powers, but Russia declined to endorse the accord, and many protesters said nothing short of the president’s resignation would get them off the street.... The deal reached Friday instead leaves Mr.Yanukovych in power until for at least the end of the year. It calls for early presidential elections in December, a swift return to a constitution of 2004 that sharply limited the president’s powers and the establishment within 10 days of a “government of national trust.”
You can follow the events at the live feeds below.

Posted by Mandy Nagy on February 20, 2014 10 Comments

A Ukrainian skier has dropped out of the Sochi Winter Olympics as an act of solidarity with protesters in Ukraine, amid escalated violence in Kiev this week. From the Associated Press via ABC News: A Ukrainian skier has withdrawn from the Olympics in response to the deaths...

Posted by William A. Jacobson on February 20, 2014 38 Comments
In my post Microaggression Mania: McGill U. student leader apologizes for .gif of Obama kicking open door, I detailed the punishment and apology of McGill University student leader Brian Farnan for sending a .gif image of Obama kicking open a door.  The image was from a famous parody video on the Jay Leno show. Farnan's apology read, in part (emphasis added):
Oppression, as outlined in SSMU’s Equity Policy, means the exercise of power by a group of people over another group of people with specific consideration of cultural, historical and living legacies. The image in question was an extension of the cultural, historical and living legacy surrounding people of color—particularly young men—being portrayed as violent in contemporary culture and media. By using this particular image of President Obama, I unknowingly perpetuated this living legacy and subsequently allowed a medium of SSMU’s communication to become the site of a microaggression; for this, I am deeply sorry.”
Obama kick open door gif Since my post, the issue has gone viral, with widespread reporting in the U.S. and Canada.  All of the reporting has been mocking regarding the polically correct speech policies at McGill and on other campuses, where simple humor is an offense if it subjectively offends someone.  McGill seems to be an extreme because of its policies allowing for  the student government  (the Student Society of McGill University -- SSMU) to process and prosecute such complaint and impose punishment.  It has the appearance of a Lord of the Flies style oppression of those with unpopular opinions. SSMU has issued a press statement, embedded at the bottom of the post.  The press statement says very little of substance, but apparently is SSMU's only on-record response to the outrage. The bland language is worthy of the worst bureaucratic tendencies of the politically correct apparatus, a microcosm of the banality of political correctness. I spoke with Farnan today about the whole incident.  He confirmed some basic details:  A complaint was filed over the .gif, the SSMU Equity Commission ruled against him, that ruling was upheld by the SSMU Legislative Council, and the apology was issued as required by SSMU.  An attempt to reverse the decision was rebuffed by the Legislative Council. I asked Farnan if he felt forced to issue the apology.  He said that he preferred the word "mandated" over forced.  He explained that at as an officer of SSMU, he is bound by its rulings, and that if he did not obey the rulings, there would be consequences: "As a public figure I have to adopt the decision of the council." I asked him if the apology was "heartfelt," and he stated that he was uncomfortable with that term in the question but that he "meant the apology." 

Posted by A.F. Branco on February 20, 2014 22 Comments

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...

MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH