02-04-2017, 02:23 PM
(02-04-2017, 02:03 PM)wildcats forever Wrote: You're right. An agenda would be involved in straightening out this mess. Any EO that contains unconstitutional elements should be immediately replaced with one that is totally devoid of any constitutional risk. Stop the public outcry nonsense, get the judges off the front page, and move on to the next issue without any further distractions. That's MY agenda.
Understood, but,respectfully, you're making a political argument, not a legal one. As for stop the public outcry, that's not possible. If Trump fulfills any campaign promise there will be public outcry. People have whipped themselves into a hysterical froth. You'll note I do a lot of countering arguments around here lately but not a lot of supporting Trump? That's because I don't, largely, support his actions. What I do not like, and never will, is hysteria, hyperbole and arguments based on false information, deliberately or otherwise. This country has become a hotbed for all of these.
(02-04-2017, 02:04 PM)GMDino Wrote: Weird. You'd think the judge would know that over a random internet poster.
But whatever....
He does. Not working with judges you are apparently unaware of the fact that many, if not most, let the personal opinions bleed into their decisions. For example, if we have a case go before Judge A, I can tell you that the defendant will likely get probation. If the exact same case goes before Judge B then I can tell you that the defendant will get a long state prison term. Know your judges is one of the first things I teach my subordinates because what will fly in one judge's courtroom will get you pilloried in another.
This specific incident is an outstanding case of judge shopping. It was no accident that this case was filed in a particular area so as to get a particular judge. Do a little research to find out why.
