Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by QGator2414, Jul 15, 2013.
Here's the relevant part of the federal statute:
Sounds like Holder has a case in Mississippi if the allegations are true...
US v. Hatch challenged the general federal hate crimes statute (the Shepard and Byrd Act one) on constitutional grounds and the Tenth Circuit upheld it in an opinion released less than two weeks ago.
Was upheld against both an equal protection and a lack of authority challenge on the basis of being authorized by Section 2 of the Thirteenth Amendment (that it grants Congress enforcement powers to legislate against the badges and incidents of slavery) relying largely on Hodges for the idea that Thirteenth Amendment protections extend to all races, not only those formerly enslaved, and Jones for Congress's power to define and legislate against the badges and incidents of slavery.
I was a happier person before knowing that any court had offered that 13th Amendment reasoning. Or an equal protection reasoning. How in the sphincter of hell does a law punishing people for bad thoughts touch on equal protection? I could sooner see it as a violation of equal protection than anything else.
It's thoughtcrime, nothing more or less. There's nothing worse about killing someone because they are of a certain race than there is about killing them at all.
Sorry if I wasn't clear, the defendant alleged that the act violated equal protection by only extending protections to certain groups. The Court rejected that argument on the basis that the Court has already ruled that the Thirteenth Amendment protects all races, not just those subjected to slavery, and that the act does as well, but even if that wasn't true the argument necessarily failed because equal protection doesn't exist extraconstitutionally and as another amendment the Thirteenth Amendment can't violate the Fourteenth Amendment.
Okay, but I'm still left to understand that racial animus is itself one of the "badges and incidents" of slavery? I'll admit, I haven't read anything you linked, I know it's not your job to brief the thing for me, but I have a feeling reading it will put me in a foul mood.
I never ever thought that I would EVER hear the President of the USA encourage people to protest regarding a jury verdict. But I did.
These events are really disturbing me very deeply. I am sorry that Trevon lost his life. The shooter was arrested and had a trial. He was not found guilty of any crimes.
It has been forgotten that the previous prosecutor refused to arrest and charge Zimmerman, based on the fact that there was no evidence of a crime. There was an outrage and another prosecutor was brought in and charged him. It was a very weak case, but protestors got their trial.
Zimmerman was found not guilty to the charges against him.
Now that segments of the population are unhappy with the verdict, all kinds of sh!t and threats and machinations are being broadcasted. Threats of violent protests across the US have been made. Threats of murders have been made.
The citizens of the US are being threatened with serious violence and death, because some groups aren't happy with the verdict.
For the first time in my life, along with other trends and governmental decisions, I am seriously concerned about the future of the USA.
When did Obama say that?
Any other conservatives want to chime in?
It's largely relying on Jones for the idea that Congress can identify and legislate against the badges and incidents with a rational basis test applied to having done so. The actual Act contained Thirteenth Amendment congressional findings, namely:
and the court found that met the rational basis test, and that if the Defendant wanted to argue that the recent cutback in federalism cases also undermined the Jones rationale he would have to make that argument to the Supreme Court because the Tenth Circuit was bound by Jones as controlling and non-overruled precedent.
(There is also a second offense under the statute that uses a weapon having traveled in interstate commerce as the hook for Congress's power to legislate, but that aspect of the statute wasn't at issue in the appeal.)
All of the above breaks down when there is not equal enforcement. The idea that the law applies to all races founders when the DOJ uses selective enforcement in order to facilitate a political agenda.
Interesting post on Volokh about the potential constitutional issues raised by the Shephard Act today.
Thankfully it won't happen.
But I will ALWAYS wonder what would have happened if Z had been convicted, and then some white guy got mad and shot a few blacks in retaliation for that injustice.
I suspect that obsama, holder, pelousy, reid, kerry, hellary, the usual suspects, every last one of them would have stampeded to the airwaves with the biggest cheshire-cat grins EVER on all their faces at their good fortune, and that all regular programming would have been pre-empted for a 24-7 infomercial witch hunt on the airwaves and there would have been calls for the guy to be hanged publicly, if not burned at the stake. They might have declared Martial Law, or banned the GOP. It would have been their Dream Come True to be able to smear and vilify white men for all time.
I suspect they were just HOPING they would get such a "make my day" opportunity.
Zimmerman's parents are in hiding because of death threats, they have not been able to even contact their son since the trial. The attorneys for Zimmerman have received death threats as well as the chief of police. Riots have taken place, innoncent businesses owners have had their businesses damaged.
Despite that, our president and his AG arre actually abetting these actions.
What is our society becoming? The past is over and with actions like this, the future is not looking so hot.
Some people cannot accept the fact that the jury found Zimmerman not guilty (which is not the same as being found innocent) based on the facts presented at trial. They assume, without factual foundation, that Zimmerman acted because Trevon Martin was an African American. The choose to ignore the fact that Zimmerman is Hispanic.
The FBI investigated this previously, and found no evidence that Zimmerman acted because Trevon was black. There is no such evidence.
Where is the outrage and concern that young blacks are being killed at an alarming rate in Chicago? Why isn't that a huge concern and basis for nationwide peaceful protests instead of a verdict in a routine case in a relatively small town in central Florida? People raise self-defense as a defense in many criminal cases. This case is not unique.
Why would the Justice Dept become involved in a state court case but not in Fast and Furious, Bengazi and targeting by the IRS?
To be sure, I feel terrible for Trevon, his mother, father and other family members. This should not have happened. That, however, does not mean that Zimmerman was guilty of a crime. Clearly, it does not mean that Zimmerman was motivated by hatred of African Americans.
Query: What would Martin Luther King have done??
Eric Holder would deserve to be disbarred and a lawsuit if he tries to prosecute Zimmerman against the weight of all evidence, the FBI's own report, and a state acquittal. I am almost quaking with outrage on behalf of the dignity of the legal system at his standing there intentionally misrepresenting the law.
DOJ has set up a website, for anyone in nthe Sanford area, to contact with any info that Zimmerman could possibly be a racist. Witch hunt at it's finest. There will be so many lies reported it will be unbelievable.
Yep. This entire thing is an insult to the FBI who already did this exact investigation on the exact some evidence. And it isn't like an FBI that answered to this loathesome man Holder wasn't looking for a race angle with all diligence.
@iowahawkblog: We have a "Dept of Justice" that organizes pre-trial protests, and eggs on post-trial vigilantism. In a sane world, this is impeachable.
Hey wait ! Narfle, we hardly got to know ye !