Still waiting almost 5 years for a federal judge to rule that Trump’s attack on our Utah national monuments was illegal. It was a blatant violation of the plain language of the Federal Land Management and Policy Act of 1976. Ought to be a no-brainer. Failure to get a decision on this leaves the door open for more such violations.
10 Likes
Most likely explanation is that they cannot manage to come up with a legal standard that allows them to affirm the trial court’s ruling that the statute was unconstitutional as applied to this plaintiff while not also imperiling sex offender registries/restrictions more generally.
10 Likes
The thing that’s most worrisome here is that the 11th Circuit panel is clearly terrified to overturn what is a fundamentally fascist law.
One thing about fascist regimes is that they’re Tough on Crime. Sure, they imprison and execute a lot of people for political crimes, or just dispense with any form of process and just disappear them. But regular street criminals with no Party connections are treated with the same casual disregard for life and liberty that marks the regime’s approach to everything. The death penalty gets greatly expanded and is enthusiastically applied for a wide range of crimes. Those who don’t get their heads chopped off (literally in the Nazis case-they adopted the guillotine for criminal cases) get long, brutal sentences.
The moral cowardice that seems to be driving this delay, cowardice that may be hiding behind self-delusion that if the opinion is just detailed and scholarly enough, there won’t be any hysterical GQP politicians demanding their heads, bodes ill for the capacity of the judiciary to deal with the rising tide of fascism generally.
And, yeah, a lot of the problem here may be that they’re hoping to find a way to rule narrowly enough to avoid having apply as precedent to the vast array of less draconian, and widely supported and popular, post-conviction sex offender liberty deprivation laws nationwide.
Hell, I’m not even against imposing burdensome conditions on most real sex offenders post release. (By “real” I mean "not including purely technical convictions, e.g. people arrested for indecent exposure because they were stone drunk and took a pee in an ally or women who wore a thong bikini in Myrtle Beach.) But this law is basically just a state effort to drive them to suicide.
15 Likes
Lifetime appointment and you don’t have to do anything? This sounds like my dream job.
5 Likes
The court of appeals shouldn’t need seven years, or five years, or two years.
It does if it’s broken… too.
1 Like
More evidence that the courts are broken and need serious reform: sub-SCOTUS Edition.
1 Like
And drop off all the new Russian defectors in the Maralago parking lot while I’m at it.
1 Like
Just curious: what was the specific residency restriction that kept McGuire from living with his spouse?
1 Like
I don’t know any specifics of this case, but generally proximity to schools seems like a safe bet. Even if the offenders don’t have a record targeting children, it seems like it’s common for registered offenders to have to live far from schools (just in case, apparently).
1 Like
Of course it doesn’t matter apparently that national security, which sometimes requires something be done in a less than “deliberative process”, is deep in this mix. Trump must have his delay to figure out how to get his thumb out of his ass.
At some point someone with authority over Judge Cannon ( if someone like that even exists) needs to ream her out face to face. I realize she has a lifetime appointment but does that give her the right to damage national security if she is so moved? The bias judge Cabbon exhibits is astounding.
1 Like
You know what? They don’t have to take up a case on appeal. If they weren’t going to rule on this, they should have just stayed out of it. This much time passing? Well excuse me, it looks like they’re in the tank for someone.
1 Like
No really. Seven years after his indictment Ken Paxton still has not been tried on securities fraud.
4 Likes
The thing about homeless sex offenders is that the authorities generally have no idea where they are living.
It’s probably why they were/are being asked to check in every week. To try to let the Government track them.
2 Likes
Even NYC civil court and housing court is far more expeditious than the 11th circuit. Currently Queens civil court has a two year backlog due to the pandemic.
2 Likes
Totally aberrant.
2 Likes
A direct appeal from the district court, on a novel constitutional issue no less… How do they simply refuse to take the case? Where would that leave the case? How could the movant seek treview by the Stupremes?
Oh, and a minor detail that might could be at home in the lede, maybe:
Was the dc’s order stayed pending appeal, either by the dc or by the panel?
Is it a secret, @josh_kovensky?
Asked? I don’t think that’s the appropriate word. Maybe ordered would be strong enough. But given that said homeless person must present himself at two agencies, not likely located near each other, each week, and given that a homeless person just might be without transportation, I would favor this:
Extorted
2 Likes
The article also fails to note that the Hon. William J. Pryor of the 11th Circuit…
… is a former Attorney General of the State of Alabama.
1 Like
They’re still trying to serve him the subpoena.
1 Like