|
Kalit posted:Do you not think this opens the door for convicted felons too? IANAL, but if something is a fundamental right, it sounds like it could be argue that everyone should have it. No, because felony convictions are grounds for forfeiture of rights, see: imprisonment, loss of voting rights, etc. The difference is an indictment is only a formal accusation. edit: Without reading the decision my immediate question is how this doesn't fall under the same category as pre-trial detainment.
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 14:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
Jarmak posted:edit: Without reading the decision my immediate question is how this doesn't fall under the same category as pre-trial detainment. If the rule of law was still a thing, my guess would be that pretrial detainment is generally determined by a judge instead of a blanket law, so the judge could probably still order that the accused be not allowed access to guns for the duration of trial. But that assumes anything matters anymore.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 14:48
|
|
|
It's because the Judge is using the standard set under Breun by the Supreme Court earlier this year that applies the 14th amendment specifically to include consideration of the second amendment. There is no fundamental right to never be detained for any reason. Bruen says that courts have to take into consideration whether a law prevents a law-abiding citizen (i.e. one without a conviction) from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 14:56
|
|
|
The judge seems correct in this ruling, honestly? It's one thing if it's a conviction or even set as a term of pretrial detainment by a judge, but as a blanket law based on indictment it seems real bad. Imagine I put a note in here about indicting a ham sandwich.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 15:08
|
|
|
Kalit posted:Do you not think this opens the door for convicted felons too? IANAL, but if something is a fundamental right, it sounds like it could be argue that everyone should have it. The supreme court can do whatever it wants, obviously. Right now they have currently called out felons very specifically as a group, as not having this right. Maybe they will change their mind in 2023.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 15:15
|
|
|
shimmy shimmy posted:The judge seems correct in this ruling, honestly? It's one thing if it's a conviction or even set as a term of pretrial detainment by a judge, but as a blanket law based on indictment it seems real bad. Imagine I put a note in here about indicting a ham sandwich. The law stopped you from buying new guns while you were under indictment, but it didn't ban you from owning your existing guns or anything. The judge is probably correct based on the Supreme Court ruling earlier this year, but he had leeway to determine whether "not purchasing a new gun, but being able to keep previous guns until the court case is over" counted as a fundamental violation of a constitutional right or not. The practical impact will be pretty minimal, but from an empirical/results perspective, it's hard to see how "a couple people might die because of this" outweighs "some people might not be able tp purchase a new gun for 1 to 4 months" in terms of negative results for society. But, the judge specifically says in their ruling that the Supreme Court ruled that the 2nd amendment is as important as the others, so they can't pass laws "balancing" taking rights away for the accused vs empirical good because it is a fundamental right - even if there were a massive public safety issue around it. The judge didn't have to go quite as far as he did, but he is working within the framework of what the Supreme Court ruled. It's a Supreme Court issue rather than this particular judge issue. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Sep 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 15:16
|
|
|
So DeSantis is almost certainly doing the same stunt again, but this time with Delaware https://twitter.com/dwuhlfelderlaw/status/1572191380109406208?s=46&t=fe2V0R-nVC_P5tRCQXL5lA https://twitter.com/h_edelman/status/1572210394025889792?s=46&t=fe2V0R-nVC_P5tRCQXL5lA FlamingLiberal fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Sep 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:30
|
|
|
There's got to be some federal lever to make this stop. Can like the FAA ground the plane he's using or something? US Marshals arrest the pilots when they land? Any even token resistance? I know the final answer is probably going to be "in a 6-3 decision, Kavanaugh holds that human trafficking to own the libs is a 1st amendment right" but there's gotta be something they can do right
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:34
|
|
|
Yeah I'd assume that it would be pretty easy to meet the plane on the tarmac with a few federal agents and arrest anyone immediately responsible for hauling immigrants around illegally
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
This poo poo seems like stuff that makes the base happy but anyone else finds tacky at best. maybe the republicans don't really need more middle of the road conservatives and maybe they'd vote for people like desantis anyways, but it all just feels like a weird stunt that doesn't really move the needle in your favor in any way
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:37
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:There's got to be some federal lever to make this stop. Can like the FAA ground the plane he's using or something? US Marshals arrest the pilots when they land? Any even token resistance? I know the final answer is probably going to be "in a 6-3 decision, Kavanaugh holds that human trafficking to own the libs is a 1st amendment right" but there's gotta be something they can do right I expect that the federal government has the ability to stop federal crimes from happening in federal jurisdictions. Let's see if they do!
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:39
|
|
|
Levitate posted:This poo poo seems like stuff that makes the base happy but anyone else finds tacky at best. These stunts suck up airtime and are better for the GOP than the ongoing abortion ban consequences.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:41
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:There's got to be some federal lever to make this stop. Can like the FAA ground the plane he's using or something? US Marshals arrest the pilots when they land? Any even token resistance? I know the final answer is probably going to be "in a 6-3 decision, Kavanaugh holds that human trafficking to own the libs is a 1st amendment right" but there's gotta be something they can do right I mean there is a clear constitutional violation of states enforcing, by definition, federal authority stuff unless there are contracts/MOU's in place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:42
|
|
|
At this point it seems like proud human trafficker Ron de Santis is just waiting to piss off the wrong person.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:43
|
|
|
Madkal posted:At this point it seems like proud human trafficker Ron de Santis is just waiting to piss off the wrong person. To your point, if Biden really wants to push this, Ron DeSantis has probably opened a lot of his donors up to investigation and all it takes is one to make an example of (legally).
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:44
|
|
|
I've been searching for a quote or clip, but have Biden or Garland said anything publicly about the flights? I guess I'd feel better even if it didn't have an action plan if someone in the prosecuting federal crimes command structure said "Hey yeah we're not going to allow this we're doing X" or even just that first bit E: per Fox News (I know), his response: pres Biden posted:President Biden called on Republican governors Thursday to stop sending migrants into Democratic cities and communities, calling such actions "political stunts" and "un-American." https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-says-republicans-playing-politics-after-transporting-migrants-marthas-vineyard-vps-home projecthalaxy fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Sep 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
Leon Sumbitches posted:I'll not sure they want the schools to be excellent, either. It seems like an uneducated populous has been an unstated goal for decades. Book learning lets the devil in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:51
|
|
|
Not sure if this made the thread yet, but migrants were also flown from Texas to Sacramento under false pretenses. It seems like this has been a pretty widespread thing, and people should absolutely go to jail over it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:53
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:So DeSantis is almost certainly doing the same stunt again, but this time with Delaware This is the dumbest poo poo because it's such an easy messaging victory for Biden. If I was in charge of his appearance schedule, I'd say he should meet them on the tarmac when they land for a photo op. It won't happen but it would be such an easy win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:56
|
|
|
KillHour posted:This is the dumbest poo poo because it's such an easy messaging victory for Biden. If I was in charge of his appearance schedule, I'd say he should meet them on the tarmac when they land for a photo op. It won't happen but it would be such an easy win. It does seem like something that would make more sense ahead of the primary than the general. The redhats have been talking about doing this for over a decade of course, but I don't think we're yet at the point where it sits right with the general electorate, at least while such a thing still exists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:59
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:There's got to be some federal lever to make this stop. Can like the FAA ground the plane he's using or something? US Marshals arrest the pilots when they land? Any even token resistance? I know the final answer is probably going to be "in a 6-3 decision, Kavanaugh holds that human trafficking to own the libs is a 1st amendment right" but there's gotta be something they can do right They can have people at the very obvious destination of that plane ready to provide services and aid, and also to interview the migrants as part of the investigation. Other than that, there isn't really any pressing legal justification for halting the planes or arresting the pilots, unless they find evidence that Abbott is gonna throw the asylum-seekers out the side door 20,000 feet up. It's a pain for both the asylum-seekers and the people who have to scramble to arrange services for them, but it's not an "arrest them preemptively without a warrant or court order" level of irreparable injury.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 17:59
|
|
|
KillHour posted:This is the dumbest poo poo because it's such an easy messaging victory for Biden. If I was in charge of his appearance schedule, I'd say he should meet them on the tarmac when they land for a photo op. It won't happen but it would be such an easy win. It's an issue for Biden, to Biden voters. For DeSantis, it's also a win, no matter what.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:07
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:It's an issue for Biden, to Biden voters. Is it? Do you really want to energize the other party's base right before an election, when you know that low-turnout races are what gives you an advantage?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:11
|
|
|
KillHour posted:This is the dumbest poo poo because it's such an easy messaging victory for Biden. If I was in charge of his appearance schedule, I'd say he should meet them on the tarmac when they land for a photo op. It won't happen but it would be such an easy win. I dunno, don't underestimate that squishy middle of voters who don't like Trump but are breathlessly worried about illegal immigrants. Anecdotally, my parents, who on most issues trend left-ish and wanted Bernie to win, were briefly snookered by CNN blasting poo poo nonstop about crises at the border and bought into the whole "well they're BREAKING THE LAW" thing for a while until we talked about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:They can have people at the very obvious destination of that plane ready to provide services and aid, and also to interview the migrants as part of the investigation. Yeah I guess you're right, its just kinda irritating/discouraging that Abbott and DeSantis and their pals just get to Do Whatever and brag about it on TV and say they'll do it over and over and all the magas at my work get to taunt me about it and there's nothing I can point to besides Biden at a Hispanic Rights dinner asking them to maybe knock it off instead of having some sort of like actual response. He didn't even say we'd have social services waiting on the tarmac like you suggested!
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:18
|
|
|
New York and Delaware should buy a one-way ticket to Florida for anyone caught with a gun
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:19
|
|
|
KillHour posted:Is it? Do you really want to energize the other party's base right before an election, when you know that low-turnout races are what gives you an advantage? The idea in politics is you energize your own base, more than the other guy energizes his. The chuds love this poo poo and it 100% doesn't matter to them what actually happens, it's still going to play to them as if Biden is shocked and dismayed as his immigration chickens come home to roost, no matter how he responds. They already have convinced themselves that's what happened in marthas vineyard. This is just an amped up Election Migrant Caravan. Whether or not there's an actual migrant caravan is irrelevant. Hopefully Biden can amp up Democratic voters over this and abortion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:23
|
|
|
haveblue posted:New York and Delaware should buy a one-way ticket to Florida for anyone caught with a gun Free florida vacation travel for anyone packing? Sold! It's kinda hard to "deport" anyone in the US since y'know, freedom of movement.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:23
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:The idea in politics is you energize your own base, more than the other guy energizes his. Yeah this is my experience. The flight to Martha’s Vineyard was a huge win and the police [or someone?] are forcing Vineyards residents to let the migrants camp in their front yards, per the 300 pound idiot at my work. The fact that this does not appear to have happened is, as always, irrelevant. He heard it on TruthSocial or whatever so it became true, and I became owned
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:26
|
|
|
So in the Trump documents case, he's got the special master now, and the special master asked them to tell us if he declassified any of the documents, and they say "nuh uh we don't want to say if we declassified anything because that will damage his criminal defense." Why are they trying to keep the waters murky regarding declassification? If he's gonna say it's fine that he had them because they were all declassified, then how does it hurt him to say that now? I've heard people online saying "well, if he says these 10 documents were declassified, then he's admitting the others weren't" but why can't he just say "yeah they're all declassified"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
The actual potential crime would be leading them there under false pretenses with a promise of financial gain. It seems that might have happened, but it's also not totally clear what was said/promised/what the migrants understood from the information that is public. Otherwise, giving someone a plane ride for free that they voluntary accept is not actually a crime. It's just a huge dick move to do it to people who are waiting for an asylum review and may not really 100% know what it is going on. Especially since they are dumping them without any warning to the other jurisdictions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:32
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:So in the Trump documents case, he's got the special master now, and the special master asked them to tell us if he declassified any of the documents, and they say "nuh uh we don't want to say if we declassified anything because that will damage his criminal defense." It’s all a play for time. If the House changes hands in early 2023 that’s a major disruption to the case. If the White House changes hands in 2025, the case evaporates. They don’t actually need to prove he’s innocent, just prevent him from being convicted until one of those things happens, and the best way to do that is ask dumb questions, give dumb answers, and sow confusion and roadblocks
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:34
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:So in the Trump documents case, he's got the special master now, and the special master asked them to tell us if he declassified any of the documents, and they say "nuh uh we don't want to say if we declassified anything because that will damage his criminal defense." Because "gently caress you make me" that's why. Sure that can probably be dressed up in flowery language and workshopped by a PR firm into a better message, but that's the message. Courts aren't a threat to Donny they're a playground where he gets to fling poo poo wherever he wants and enough money later he usually wins or draws, and anything resembling a loss is no-fault-admitted slap on the wrist spreadsheet value changes more damaging to his ego than his lifestyle or freedom of movement.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:36
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:So in the Trump documents case, he's got the special master now, and the special master asked them to tell us if he declassified any of the documents, and they say "nuh uh we don't want to say if we declassified anything because that will damage his criminal defense." IANAL but IIRC classification is at best a side issue. Saying "Yeah I declassified these nuclear secrets" would be used as evidence he knowingly kept nuclear secrets and contradict the claim that he just scooped up a bunch of papers and whoops there were things in there about our ally's nuclear defenses
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
projecthalaxy posted:Yeah this is my experience. The flight to Martha’s Vineyard was a huge win and the police [or someone?] are forcing Vineyards residents to let the migrants camp in their front yards, per the 300 pound idiot at my work. The fact that this does not appear to have happened is, as always, irrelevant. He heard it on TruthSocial or whatever so it became true, and I became owned I've talked to multiple people convinced that the FBI is leaking fake info about Trump having classified documents and literally Trump leaked that and admitted to it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:41
|
|
|
The DOJ just announced that they have indicted one group from Minnesota for fraudulently claiming a quarter of a billion dollars in CARES act funds starting in April 2020 and continuing up through June of 2021. That is the single largest instance of fraud involving Covid funds by a single group. They also announced that they still have over 2,000 cases of PPP loan-specific fraud they are investigating, but that it is a huge backlog and could take another two years. https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1572262590042017798 quote:U.S. charges ‘brazen’ theft of $250 million from pandemic food program
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:44
|
|
|
haveblue posted:It’s all a play for time. If the House changes hands in early 2023 that’s a major disruption to the case. If the White House changes hands in 2025, the case evaporates. They don’t actually need to prove he’s innocent, just prevent him from being convicted until one of those things happens, and the best way to do that is ask dumb questions, give dumb answers, and sow confusion and roadblocks Additionally, if they claim he declassified documents they'd likely have to produce something beyond just a bald assertion that declassification actually took place, which is tricky since, you know, it's all a load of bullshit Trump thought up retroactively.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:48
|
|
|
Phenotype posted:Why are they trying to keep the waters murky regarding declassification? If he's gonna say it's fine that he had them because they were all declassified, then how does it hurt him to say that now? I've heard people online saying "well, if he says these 10 documents were declassified, then he's admitting the others weren't" but why can't he just say "yeah they're all declassified"? Given how interested the lawyers seem to be in finding out what the documents the FBI confiscated were, it's not clear that they know precisely what they were, and don't have a file number to give to say "we declassified File2015212." On top of that, not even the President has the power to just mentally declassify something without telling anyone. There's a process which has to be followed, which produces a paper trail. If there's no paper trail to PROVE that there was a declassification, then there was no declassification.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:52
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The actual potential crime would be leading them there under false pretenses with a promise of financial gain. It seems that might have happened, but it's also not totally clear what was said/promised/what the migrants understood from the information that is public. Is this actually true? Can I legally just strand someone in a completely foreign environment as long as they chose to get in my car?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
Yawgmoft posted:Is this actually true? Can I legally just strand someone in a completely foreign environment as long as they chose to get in my car? Depending on the context, yes. It isn't a crime to give someone a free ticket and have them voluntarily accept it. The actual potential criminal part comes from misleading or defrauding them. There may be civil liability if some kind of economic damages occur to the person as a result of your actions/misrepresentation, but if they voluntarily take a plane ticket to somewhere where they don't know anybody, then it isn't a crime to just give them a ride for free.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2022 18:58
|
|