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 Kemberlee Kaye on September 19, 2014 15 Comments
Earlier this week the Democrats released a video contrasting Rand Paul statements against Rand Paul's previous statements on a handful of issues. The video is a hatchet job and of course some things are taken out of context, but it highlights a major issue that's been bugging me about Rand Paul. Take a look at the video the Democrats put together: It's not uncommon for politicians to change their views, platforms, or opinions on issues. They are there to serve at the will of the people (at least in theory). Take ISIS for example. ISIS is a different kind of threat to American interests now than they were a few years ago. A policy change from isolationism to one that's considering an intervention strategy is warranted and few would fault Paul for changing his mind on this particular issue. My criticism of Paul is not because he's become an interventionist in a Libertarian body, after all, people don't flock to presidential election polls all riled up about foreign policy. My criticism is not that he's changed his mind. My criticism stems from Rand Paul's refusal to 1) admit his policy stance has changed and 2) handle this policy shift gracefully rather than indignantly.

LATEST NEWS

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 19, 2014 28 Comments
The last time we visited the Kansas Senate race, we noted that Republican Pat Roberts was at risk, but that he may have caught a lucky break when the Democratic candidate was not permitted to take his name off the ballot in order to unite around the independent candidate. Having the Democrat's name on the ballot would have siphoned away some votes from the independent challenger, helping Roberts. The Kansas Supreme Court, however, ruled yesterday that the Democrat's name must be removed from the ballot:
The Kansas Supreme Court ruled unanimously Thursday that the state must remove the name of the Democratic candidate running against Republican Sen. Pat Roberts from the November ballot, adding another twist to a now-hotly contested race. The court's decision leaves independent Greg Orman, who has been rising in the polls, as the only major opponent currently in the running to take on the 78-year-old incumbent. The court agreed with Democrat Chad Taylor, saying his formal letter of withdrawal to the secretary of state's office was sufficient to get his name off the ballot. The court also said it did not "need to act" regarding Secretary of State Kris Kobach's "allegation" that the Democratic party must name a new candidate for the race. Kobach said earlier Thursday that the Democratic Party is legally obligated to pick a new nominee and set a Sept. 26 deadline.
There had been the possibility that Democrats would be forced to name a replacement:

Posted by Andrew Branca on September 19, 2014 44 Comments
A JD student at the University of Miami School of Law--and a long-time fan of "The Law of Self Defense"--contacted me recently to share a notice he'd received from the school. It seems for the Fall 2014 semester they will be offering a "short course" (good for one credit) with a focus on the Trayvon Martin case, entitled "Legal Advocacy, Media and the Pursuit of Social Justice." The first note of interest is that the course is being "taught" by none other than Jasmine Rand, an attorney with the firm of Crump & Park. Benjamin Crump, of course, was the public legal face of the Martin family, as he is currently the public legal face of the Mike Brown family in the Ferguson shooting. Attorney Rand herself "leads the firm’s Civil Rights Department. Her evolving practice focuses on civil rights, wrongful death, civil rape, and catastrophic personal injury." Ms. Rand is perhaps most memorable for her appearance on the Greta Van Susteren show on Fox News in the aftermath of the George Zimmerman trial. Zimmerman was, of course, unanimously acquitted by the jury of all charges after mere hours of deliberations. In the course of her four minutes or so of air time Ms. Rand expressed her view that the jury in that trial had not delivered "justice." When asked if it was not her duty as a lawyer to accept a duly empaneled jury's verdict, Ms. Rand responded that she has a greater duty than being a lawyer, and that was to be a "social engineer."  Good stuff:

Posted by David Gerstman on September 19, 2014 3 Comments
The New York Times earlier this month published an expose of how foreign money influenced think tanks. One of the subjects of the article was the Brookings Institution, its vice president Indyk and $14.8 million grant that the government of Qatar had given Brookings. A former scholar at Brookings cautioned that because of Qatar's influence any report coming out of the institution is likely not to be the "full story." The New York Times didn't seem much concerned with the implication of its reporting but some people did notice. In Tablet this week Lee Smith pounced on the Times for not looking into the implications of what it reported.
Or maybe the editors decided that it was all on the level, and the money influenced neither Indyk’s government work on the peace process nor Brookings’ analysis of the Middle East. Or maybe journalists just don’t think it’s worth making a big fuss out of obvious conflicts of interest that may affect American foreign policy. Maybe Qatar’s $14.8 million doesn’t affect Brookings’ research projects or what the think tank’s scholars tell the media, including the New York Times, about subjects like Qatar, Hamas, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and other related areas in which Qatar has key interests at stake. Maybe the think tank’s vaunted objectivity, and Indyk’s personal integrity and his pride in his career as a public servant, trump the large piles of vulgar Qatari natural gas money that keep the lights on and furnish the offices of Brookings scholars and pay their cell-phone bills and foreign travel.
Smith also observed that the Qatar connection made Indyk poorly suited as an interlocutor for both the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Posted by Amy Miller on September 19, 2014 10 Comments
A new study from Johns Hopkins University suggests exactly what many conservative activists have been complaining about for years: Washington is out of touch with the rest of America. From Johns Hopkins:
Surveying 850 people who either work in government or directly with it, researchers found that the inside-the-Beltway crowd has very little in common with America at large. Washington insiders are more likely to be white. They are more educated. Their salaries are higher, they vote more and have more faith in the fairness of elections. They are probably Democrat and liberal. They more diligently follow the news. And they think the mechanizations of government couldn’t be easier to comprehend.
There are easy and reasonable explanations for much of this: if you live in Washington, you likely either work for the government, or work at a firm that works with the government. Many of these jobs are specialized---law, policy analysis, statistical consulting---and generally require a graduate degree. Of course you vote---that's how you decide who you have to put up with at work for the next two, four, or six years. You read the news because you're either in it, making it, writing it, or countering it. But we all know that when it comes to mass messaging and perception, none of that matters.

LEGAL INSURRECTION QUICK TAKES

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

Maine School Administrator Objects to Dogs in the Classroom, Citing Muslim Views

UT-San Antonio Student Apologizes for Gleefully Mocking Assassination of Charlie Kirk

SEE MORE

Posted by Casey Breznick on September 19, 2014 6 Comments

The Democratic challenger for New York’s 23rd district, Martha Robertson, spoke briefly about her election campaign against incumbent Republican Tom Reed at a Cornell Democrats event Wednesday evening.

Speaking for 30 minutes to a crowd of about 40 students, Robertson, Cornell Class of 1975, mainly stuck to her autobiography and her major talking points.

We have full coverage at the Cornell Review, of which I am the Editor-in-Chief.

Legal Insurrection has covered extensively the race in NY23. Some more recent examples include: Democrat's fat shaming ads backfire in key House race (#NY23) and Martha Robertson  raising money, but still in hiding (#NY23).

Also, does everyone remember the last time Robertson visited Cornell campus? Read more here: Martha dodges my questions about fundraising.

Posted by Amy Miller on September 19, 2014 10 Comments
The BBC reports:
A statement said planes had attacked an IS logistics depot in north-east Iraq. France was already carrying out reconnaissance flights over Iraq and providing weapons to Kurdish fighters. President Hollande said on Thursday that French air strikes would only target the jihadist group's positions in Iraq, and not neighbouring Syria. He also insisted that he would not send ground troops. On Friday, Mr Hollande's office said Rafale planes had carried out the attack and "the objective was hit and completely destroyed".
Yesterday, French President François Hollande pledged his support to the U.S.-led campaign in the Middle East, citing an international duty to confront "unremitting brutality:"
The Islamic State, also known by the acronyms ISIS or ISIL, “massacres anyone who resists it; hunts minorities, notably Christians; commits atrocities against civilians; decapitates journalists; crucifies opponents; kidnaps women,” he said. “That is the movement we are up against.” Mr. Hollande traveled to Baghdad last week to help mobilize support for military strikes against Islamic militants. On Thursday, he said he had met with his top miliary advisers and had agreed to Iraq’s request for air support to reinforce Iraqi soldiers and Kurdish fighters. He said French fighter jets would strike once targets had been identified. “That means in a short time frame,” he said.

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 19, 2014 5 Comments
In our post on September 9, we asked Was Prosecutor’s union-operative wife behind “John Doe” investigation of Scott Walker?. That post was based on a report by the well-regarded legal reporter Stuart Taylor about anti-Scott Walker political bias in the office of Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm, who has led the "John Doe" investigations against Walker and a wide-range of conservative activists in Wisconsin. In his report, District attorney’s wife drove case against Wis. Gov. Walker, insider says, Taylor reported, among other things:
…. Walker became a national figure in 2011, when his “Budget Repair” bill cut state spending and sharply curbed public employee unions — perhaps the biggest reversal of public union power in U.S. history. Conservatives were delighted and liberals alarmed. Now a longtime Chisholm subordinate reveals for the first time in this article that the district attorney may have had personal motivations for his investigation. Chisholm told him and others that Chisholm’s wife, Colleen, a teacher’s union shop steward at St. Francis high school, a public school near Milwaukee, had been repeatedly moved to tears by Walker’s anti-union policies in 2011, according to the former staff prosecutor in Chisholm’s office. Chisholm said in the presence of the former prosecutor that his wife “frequently cried when discussing the topic of the union disbanding and the effect it would have on the people involved … She took it personally.”
The reaction to Taylor's report was furious and aggressive, but from an unlikely source: The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which not only outed Taylor's confidential source, but personally attacked the source in a detailed column by reporter/columnist Daniel Bice, Source who accused Chisholm of vendetta has troubled past. When I first read Bice's column, the two things struck me.

Posted by Andrew Branca on September 19, 2014 32 Comments
Here we go again.  Maybe. Late yesterday morning David Jannot, an officer with the Savannah-Chatham (Georgia) Metropolitan Police Department, shot and killed Charles Smith, a suspect that had already been handcuffed behind his back and placed inside a police cruiser, reports CNN and other news agencies. Smith was a 29-year-old black man. Bizarrely, no word has yet been released on Officer Jannot's race or ethnicity, and I was unable to locate any photographs that might be informative.  Indeed, I was unable to find any indication that any reporter had even bothered to inquire into Jannot's race or ethnicity, a seemingly odd lapse in the aftermath of Ferguson. Apparently Smith had been picked up by police on outstanding warrants around 11AM on a road that typically enjoys heavy pedestrian traffic.  It is anticipated that there will be numerous witnesses to events, and it is known that at least some of the action was captured by cameras installed in the patrol car. The police department has reported that Smith was handcuffed behind his back and placed in the patrol car.  There he managed to move his hands to the front of his body and kick out one of the car's windows. He then attempted to exit the car, and the officers saw that he had a firearm.  It was then that officer David Jannot shot and killed Smith.

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on September 19, 2014 16 Comments
The Scots voted against independence yesterday. At the time the BBC called the referendum election, the No votes (those voting against the referendum for independence) had garnered 54% of the votes counted. Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National Party and leader of the pro-independence movement, conceded the referendum loss late last night: There was nothing else on the ballot, just the question of independence.

Posted by Amy Miller on September 18, 2014 8 Comments
The nearly-year long investigation into New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's involvement in "Bridgegate" has revealed no evidence so far connecting Christie to last year's George Washington Bridge lane shutdown that caused complete gridlock for commuters traveling between New York and New Jersey. From NBC New York:
“My experience with federal law enforcement is that once you reach critical mass if you don’t have it within nine months or so you’re not likely to ever get it,” former federal prosecutor Robert W. Ray said. When the final report is issued, Christie may still face complications from the scandal, said Lee Miringoff, Director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion “That’s good news for him,” Miringoff said. “The bad news remains that politically as chief executive it looks like he was not in control of his administration at the time when this occurred. So that remains the downside for him. That doesn’t go away but this panel provides greater credibility barring any further revelations coming out.”

Posted by Kemberlee Kaye on September 18, 2014 11 Comments
This is a horribly heart-breaking story. Seven young Persians filmed their own rendition of "Happy" by Pharrell Williams, but in totalitarian regimes like Iran's, no good deed goes unpunished. A CNN Reporter tweeted the following: According to the Iran Wire, six of the accused were sentenced to six months in prison and 91 lashes, while the remaining offender was sentenced to a year in prison and 91 lashes:

Posted by New Neo on September 18, 2014 16 Comments
Today's the day of Scotland's historic vote on whether it should be an independent country after 307 years of membership in Great Britain. This a simple majority vote, and is described as very close at a near 50-50 split. Which brings us to a bigger question: should such a momentous decision be made by a simple majority of voters on a single day, at a single point in time? My answer would not be "yes." It depends on how much a person believes in a pure democracy. I do not trust it overly; I fear the tyranny of the overbearing majority that Madison feared. Apparently the Scots have no such trepidation. So, this is the sort of thing Scotland will get:
Conor Matchett, 19, a philosophy student at the University of Edinburgh, said he was both nervous and optimistic about the outcome after voting Yes. "I want change. It's as simple as that," he said. "I believe a Yes vote is the only way to do that." Matchett, originally from York, in Northern England, but granted a vote in Scotland's referendum on the grounds of his residency here, said he was voting to counter what he felt was the continuing politics of austerity from British politicians down south in Westminster. "They are attacking the welfare state and many other things that people in Scotland hold really dear," he said.
It seems unwise that a 19-year-old college student, attending school in Scotland but actually from York, should have a say in this matter. Hope/change; sound familiar? "Simple as that."

Posted by Amy Miller on September 18, 2014 20 Comments
Apple's latest update to its OS includes a lot of neat bells and whistles, but one key upgrade has privacy advocates cheering. This latest reboot has eliminated Apple's longstanding capability to access users' iPhone and iPad passcodes; in the past, this allowed Apple to both help users remember forgotten passcodes---and comply with search warrants. iOS 8, however, will actually prevent Apple from accessing user passcodes. Via the Washington Post:
“Unlike our competitors, Apple cannot bypass your passcode and therefore cannot access this data,” Apple said on its Web site. “So it’s not technically feasible for us to respond to government warrants for the extraction of this data from devices in their possession running iOS 8.” As the new operating system becomes widely deployed over the next several weeks, the number of iPhones and iPads that Apple is capable of breaking into for police will steadily dwindle to the point where only devices several years old — and incapable of running iOS 8 — can be unlocked by Apple.
This update, however, does not prevent Apple from accessing data via iCloud. Apple will still have a legal obligation to give police access to any data (pictures, music, e-mails, text messages, etc.) that is backed up to the cloud. (You can turn off this setting on your individual device.) Surprising absolutely no one, law enforcement agencies have put on their "concerned face" over the new changes:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on September 18, 2014 14 Comments
It's a good thing we still have scientists who refuse to accept settled science and scientific consensus, and keep on digging and questioning prevailing wisdoms. It seems that many of such scientists are in Israel, perhaps because politicized scientific conformity is not as prized in the "start-up nation" as it is in Euorpe and the U.S. One example from Israel we reported on previously was Nobel Prize in Chemistry awarded scientific denier:
Israeli scientist Daniel Shechtman won the 2011 Nobel Prize in chemistry on Wednesday for his discovery of quasicrystals, a mosaic-like chemical structure that researchers previously thought was impossible. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said Shechtman’s discovery in 1982 fundamentally changed the way chemists look at solid matter. It initially faced strong objections from the scientific community, and even got him kicked out of his research group in the United States.
Now another, from AFP via Times of Israel, Sweeteners boost diabetes risk, Israeli study finds:
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH