An article by Jon Adler at “Police: The Law Enforcement Magazine,” (Last viewed Apr. 11, 2012), written on behalf of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association (FLEOA) is quite critical of the recently-introduced Freedom from Over-Criminalization and Unjust Seizures (FOCUS) Act of 2012. The thrust of the article is that the FOCUS Act would put federal officers and agents at risk by taking away their right to carry firearms in the course of their criminal law enforcement duties. That claim, in short, is a canard. Because the Heritage Foundation published … More
No Comments »
Everywhere you turn, there’s no escaping the 100 year commemoration of the ill-fated voyage of the Titanic. The film is back in the theaters—in 3D no less. There are television specials and new books coming out every day this week. And Congress is passing a federal criminal law to protect the sunken ship. The latter fact might be more confounding than the reasons why “Rose” tossed her gigantic diamond necklace into the ocean at the end of the Oscar-winning 1997 film. Former Democrat Presidential Candidate and Senator John Kerry (D-MA) … More
No Comments »
Although the Supreme Court Justices are tight-lipped, most everyone else has condemned President Obama for the attack he launched at the judiciary on Monday. Even the Washington Post editorialized that “the comments strayed perilously close to a preemptive strike on the court’s legitimacy.” On Monday, Obama – who often is described as a former professor of constitutional law – made comments that demonstrated little knowledge of the concept of judicial review, while demonstrating great contempt for proper separation of powers. Obama stated that to find his administration-defining health insurance legislation … More
No Comments »
In a Washington Post opinion piece, Charles Krauthammer makes the case that it is ObamaCare that is on trial—not the Supreme Court. The focus should remain on this “fundamentally transformative law” that “remak[es] one-sixth of the economy.” Krauthammer notes that ObamaCare passed on strictly partisan lines, unlike other major social legislation such the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, and Medicaid. He suggests that perhaps the Court will not give Congress the normal “restraint and deference” in considering the constitutionality of ObamaCare. Whether or not the justices read the Washington Post opinion … More
No Comments »
In a Washington Post opinion piece, Charles Krauthammer makes the case that it is ObamaCare that is on trial—not the Supreme Court. The focus should remain on this “fundamentally transformative law” that “remak[es] one-sixth of the economy.” Krauthammer notes that ObamaCare passed on strictly partisan lines, unlike other major social legislation such the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, and Medicaid. He suggests that perhaps the Court will not give Congress the normal “restraint and deference” in considering the constitutionality of ObamaCare. Whether or not the justices read the Washington Post opinion … More
No Comments »
In a Washington Post opinion piece, Charles Krauthammer makes the case that it is ObamaCare that is on trial—not the Supreme Court. The focus should remain on this “fundamentally transformative law” that “remak[es] one-sixth of the economy.” Krauthammer notes that ObamaCare passed on strictly partisan lines, unlike other major social legislation such the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, and Medicaid. He suggests that perhaps the Court will not give Congress the normal “restraint and deference” in considering the constitutionality of ObamaCare. Whether or not the justices read the Washington Post opinion … More
No Comments »
In a Washington Post opinion piece, Charles Krauthammer makes the case that it is ObamaCare that is on trial—not the Supreme Court. The focus should remain on this “fundamentally transformative law” that “remak[es] one-sixth of the economy.” Krauthammer notes that ObamaCare passed on strictly partisan lines, unlike other major social legislation such the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, and Medicaid. He suggests that perhaps the Court will not give Congress the normal “restraint and deference” in considering the constitutionality of ObamaCare. Whether or not the justices read the Washington Post opinion … More
No Comments »
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is currently blocking implementation of voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas, claiming such measures are “unnecessary,” discriminatory and would make it harder for minorities to vote. But if you’re planning to visit Holder’s office in Washington, D.C., you better bring a photo ID. The Department of Justice has two armed guards stationed outside its headquarters to check IDs of anyone who wants to enter — employees and visitors. Holder’s politically motivated crusade against voter ID laws has the support of liberal advocacy organizations such … More
No Comments »
Instead of responding to the 5th Circuit Court’s explicit request regarding President Obama’s untoward comments about the Supreme Court’s power to overturn congressional statutes, Attorney General Eric Holder sent the judges a law student-level brief on the propriety of judicial review. The letter intentionally ignored the judge’s main question, which was, in essence: does the Department of Justice and the Attorney General of the United States agree with the comments by the President of the United States? The letter focused almost exclusively on the deference courts must pay to acts … More
No Comments »
Yesterday in a joint press conference with the Canadian prime minister and Mexican president, President Obama expressed his confidence that the Supreme Court will uphold his signature health care law, following more than six hours of oral argument before the Court last week. Obama suggested that the Court—not Congress—would be taking an “unprecedented, extraordinary step” if it overturned ObamaCare despite the fact that the Court will need to stretch its Commerce Clause jurisprudence to the outer limits to find that Congress’ mandate that people buy inflated health insurance plans is … More
No Comments »