Sunday, January 2, 2011

OFF TOPIC - SC - Governor Mark Sanford, gets out of a speeding ticket

Just goes to show, if you are rich or famous, you can get a way with about anything. He committed a crime, and should get a ticket for it, regardless of who he is. Also, he also cheated on his wife. Hypocrisy? Also, see this unrelated article, where Arnold Schwarzenegger reduces a killers sentence because he was an assembly members son. Protecting each other instead of justice.



Online Trolls Terrorize The Grieving

This is a little old, and is sick. People are twisted! They are just like the folks from the West Burrough "Baptist" Church who protest funerals. People like AZU, PJ and others come to mind, which by the way, this video was brought to our attention by one of those trolls. These types of people are probably those who live in their basement at mama's house and play World of Warcraft all day long while sipping on Monster.



Consistency is the hobgoblin

Original Article

01/02/2011

By Corey Rayburn Yung

Federal judiciary - Contradictions in interpreting the Constitution cannot be explained with reasonable distinction.

U.S. District Court Judge Henry E. Hudson recently faced the question of whether a federal statute that punished a person's inaction was within Congress' constitutional power.

The federal judge wrote that he could uphold the law if it was "reasonably adapted" to achieving a proper goal of the federal government. Ultimately, because the statute in question was part of a "comprehensive" policy that "would be severely hampered" without its enforcement provision, he held the statute to be "a valid exercise of Congress's authority."

Of course, I am not referring to Hudson's well-known opinion issued on earlier this month regarding the health care reform legislation, which he held to be unconstitutional.

I am quoting from an opinion by Judge Hudson from a year ago, in United States v. Dean, which decided constitutional issues in a criminal prosecution for failing to register as a sex offender. While a sex-offender-registration law and the recent health care reforms might seem distinct, in regard to the lawful exercise of federal power, they are strikingly similar.

In the case of health care reform, opponents have argued that Congress' power extends only to "activities" and that the so-called "mandate" actually punishes people for "inactivity" — failing to purchase health insurance. In the case of sex-offender registration, a similar "inactivity" is being regulated: failing to register with the government. Like Hudson, every federal appellate court that has reviewed the federal sex-offender-registration law has found it to be within Congress' powers.

Despite the similarities between the statutes, the more recent opinion by Hudson is radically different from when he reviewed the federal sex-offender-registration statute. In his opinion regarding the health care law, Judge Hudson wrote that in order to 'survive a constitutional challenge, the subject matter must be economic in nature ... and it must involve activity."

That clear statement of law simply cannot be reconciled with his prior opinion because a failure to register as a sex offender is neither economic nor activity. Further, in contrast to his prior opinion, Hudson dismissed out of hand the federal government's claim that the challenged enforcement mechanism was "critical" to the law's efficacy.

Now that it has come to light that Judge Hudson has a financial connection to a consulting group that has fought vigorously against health care reform, it is much clearer why he has allowed ideology to trump the rule of law. In the case of sex-offender registration, Hudson was more than willing to allow an expansive view of federal power under existing precedent. However, in reviewing health care reform, his view of the same precedents was very different.

The contradiction illustrated by Hudson in interpreting the Constitution seems to be product of his strong political views and cannot be explained by any reasonable distinction in his rulings.

Unfortunately, Hudson is not at all unusual in this dissonant stance. Because the law being challenged is the political hot potato of health care reform, some federal judges are suddenly concerned with the scope of federal power in regulating "inactivities." That those very same judges have summarily rejected challenges to constitutionally similar statutes makes little difference.

The lesson we have learned over and over again regarding constitutional claims against federal power in the last 20 years is that there is no need for coherence and consistency. Gun-Free School Zones Act? Unconstitutional. Controlled Substances Act? Constitutional. Civil commitment of sex offenders? Constitutional. Violence Against Women Act? Unconstitutional. Punishing sex offenders for failing to register? Constitutional.

When the constitutional challenges to health care reform eventually reach the Supreme Court, past practice indicates that there is no need to worry about the prior precedents of the federal courts in this area the justices will simply make up new rules as they go along.

Corey Rayburn Yung is an associate professor of law at John Marshall Law School in Chicago.



TX - 56 year old rape victim arrested for refusing TSA breast pat down

Original Article

Welcome to the USSA, where all are suspected terrorists!

12/23/2010

By JIM BERGAMO

Early Wednesday morning, a computer glitch shut down a security checkpoint for a couple of hours at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport. The line snaked out the door as many travelers waited for more than an hour and some missed their flights. One of the first people in line after that shutdown never made it through. She was arrested and banned from the airport.

[name withheld], 56, who says she is a rape victim and who has a pacemaker-type device implanted in her chest, says her constitutional rights were violated. She says she never broke any laws. But the Transportation Security Administration disagrees.

[name withheld] was hoping to spend Christmas with friends in California, but she never made it past the security checkpoint.

"I can't go through because I have the equivalent of a pacemaker in me," she said.

[name withheld] said because of the device in her body, she was led to a female TSA employee and three Austin police officers. She says she was told she was going to be patted down.

"I turned to the police officer and said, 'I have given no due cause to give up my constitutional rights. You can wand me,'" and they said, 'No, you have to do this,'" she said.

[name withheld] agreed to the pat down, but on one condition.

"I told them, 'No, I'm not going to have my breasts felt,' and she said, 'Yes, you are,'" said [name withheld].

When [name withheld] refused, she says that "the police actually pushed me to the floor, (and) handcuffed me. I was crying by then. They drug me 25 yards across the floor in front of the whole security."

An ABIA spokesman says it is TSA policy that anyone activating a security alarm has two options. One is to opt out and not fly, and the other option is to subject themselves to an enhanced pat down. [name withheld] refused both and was arrested.

Other travelers KVUE talked to say they empathize with [name withheld], but the law is the law.

"I understand her side of it, and their side as well, but it is for our protection so I have no problems with it," said Gwen Washington, who lives in Killeen.
- So, if they want to bust in your door, for "our protection" you'd be okay with it?  Careful what you wish for.

"It's unfortunate that that happened and she didn't get to fly home, but it makes me feel a little safer," said Emily Protine.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

The TSA did release a statement Wednesday that said in part, "Our officers are trained to treat all passengers with dignity and respect. Security is not optional."
- So how is this with "dignity" and "respect?"  I know I do not know all the story, but throwing her to the ground and dragging her 25 feet, then arresting her is neither.

The TSA says less than three percent of travelers get a pat-down.



Hilary Swank and Innocence Project: Help Free the Wrongfully Convicted

Website | YouTube | Facebook | More Videos



The True Story Behind "Conviction"