Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info

et_al

Subscribe to et_al's blog Subscribe

Menu

Special Features

Friday, December 15, 2017

The land agents started working the border between Texas and Mexico in the spring of 2007. Sometimes they were representatives from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Other times they were officers from the U.S. Border Patrol, uniformed in green, guns tucked into side holsters. They visited tumbledown mobile homes and suburban houses with golf course views. They surveyed farms fecund with sugar cane, cotton and sorghum growing by the mud-brown Rio Grande. They delivered their blunt news to ranchers and farmers, sheet metal workers and university professors, auto mechanics and wealthy developers.


Friday, December 08, 2017

Michael T. Slager, the white police officer whose video-recorded killing of an unarmed black motorist in North Charleston, S.C., starkly illustrated the turmoil over racial bias in American policing, was sentenced on Thursday to 20 years in prison, after the judge in the case said he viewed the shooting as a murder. The sentence, which was within the range of federal guidelines, was pronounced in Federal District Court in Charleston about seven months after Slager pleaded guilty to violating the civil rights of Walter L. Scott when he shot and killed him in April 2015. The case against Slager is one of the few instances in which a police officer has been prosecuted for an on-duty shooting.


Monday, November 20, 2017

(Reuters) - A federal court judge in California on Monday blocked an executive order from President Donald Trump to deny some federal grants to so-called sanctuary cities, undermining the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration.

"The Counties have demonstrated that the Executive Order has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights," he wrote.


Comments

You do realize that any voter corrections based upon Crosscheck info has been certified and overseen and signed off on by organizations like the ACLU, right?

Not exactly correct but a fair assumption based on the fact that in several lawsuits brought by the ACLU, NAACP, LWV and DEMOS, among other voting rights warriors, they have never, to my knowledge, sued Crosscheck. That includes a case pending in the SC regarding OH, a Crosscheck participant, voter list maintenance. The case was argued a couple days ago. In none of the district court, 6th Circuit and SC documents and briefing as well as the argument transcript is Crosscheck mentioned. Not even once. Ever.

To be fair, I'm aware of one suit that sought an injunction against a state, I don't remember which, using Crosscheck. Danni was ecstatic when she ran across it, "Ha Ha, I got you." But she didn't read it. The injunction was denied and the case never went any further. It died on the vine just like the the PA ACLU Crosscheck investigation several years ago. There is also pending a case in Illinois that has to do with a very specific and narrow issue regarding a recently amended statute. The plaintiff seeks an injunction against the state using Crosscheck in the manner permitted by the statute. Based on the limited information available, I agree with the plaintiffs. That case was filed several months ago. Beyond the complaint and request for injunction nothing on the case has been done. In neither case was Crosscheck a named party.

Trump didn't win the election, it was stolen through Interstate Crosscheck ...

Clinton campaign general counsel, Marc Elias, disagrees. www.drudge.com And my prediction in that post holds true.

... which now the administration has moved to Homeland Security so that their methods can't be strutinized.
#68 | Posted by danni

No, the administration has not. www.documentcloud.org See also www.huffingtonpost.com

That power was assumed by the SC in Marbury vs. Madison, it does not exist in the Constitution.

Danni out herself as an "originalist" albeit the disfavored "literalist" strain of originalism. Nevertheless the question is raised "who decides?" One party to a suit says Congress enacted a statute that says I can do this. The other party to the suit says Congress had no constitutional power to enact that statute. That was the situation the Marbury court faced. The Supreme Court's power to decide, judicial review, is implied in Articles III and VI.

The power of judicial review has been implied from these provisions based on the following reasoning. It is the inherent duty of the courts to determine the applicable law in any given case. The Supremacy Clause says "[t]his Constitution" is the "supreme law of the land." The Constitution therefore is the fundamental law of the United States. Federal statutes are the law of the land only when they are "made in pursuance" of the Constitution. State constitutions and statutes are valid only if they are consistent with the Constitution. Any law contrary to the Constitution is void. The federal judicial power extends to all cases "arising under this Constitution." As part of their inherent duty to determine the law, the federal courts have the duty to interpret and apply the Constitution and to decide whether a federal or state statute conflicts with the Constitution. All judges are bound to follow the Constitution. If there is a conflict, the federal courts have a duty to follow the Constitution and to treat the conflicting statute as unenforceable. The Supreme Court has final appellate jurisdiction in all cases arising under the Constitution, so the Supreme Court has the ultimate authority to decide whether statutes are consistent with the Constitution.[12] en.wikipedia.org
In fact the Congress has powers to rule over the SC which it just doesn't exercise.

Yes Congress can override SC interpretations of statutes but not Constitutional interpretations. Congress does exercise that prerogative yet you seem oblivious to the fact.

Altogether, the authors identify 275 Supreme Court statutory decisions overridden by Congress between 1967 and 2011 ... papers.ssrn.com
A prime candidate for Congressional override is your favorite whipping boy Citizens United. On that one, you're right, Congress hasn't done a damn thing.

Interstate Crosscheck gained an advantage for Trump in three swing states which gave him the election. Deny Interstate Crosscheck if you want but it won't change the facts.
#32 | Posted by danni

My only complaint with Hillary is that she accepted defeat when she should have challenged the manner in which she lost in three swing states.
#60 | Posted by danni

Factual denial is the province of conspiracy theorists like you and Palast.

Third, we have attempted to systematically catalogue and investigate every theory that has been presented to us within our ability to do so.
...
The [Clinton] campaign is grateful to all those who have expended time and effort to investigate various claims of abnormalities and irregularities. While that effort has not, in our view, resulted in evidence of manipulation of results [of the 2016 election.] https:
//medium.com/@marceelias/listening-and-responding-to-calls-for-an-audit-and-recount-2a904717ea39
WTF is Marc Elias? Fact, he was the Clinton campaign general counsel. Fact, he participated in a Virginia, a Crosscheck participating state, lawsuit raising issues regarding voter list maintenance. thevotingnews.com Fact, he is also a law partner of Bob Bauer at Perkins Coi.

WTF is Bob Bauer? Fact, he was Obama's White House Counsel. Fact, he was the co-chair of the Presidential [Obama] Commission on Election Administration. That commission had this to say about voter list maintenance,

Every effort needs to be made to facilitate coordination among the states in the development of accurate and up-to-date registration lists. States should also take advantage of other publicly available databases that indicate which voters have moved or died. ... However, data-matching tools have advanced to the point where seemingly intractable registration problems can be addressed by simple coordination between the states using publicly available databases concerning "who" lives "where." Two existing projects are emblematic of these efforts. ... The first is the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program (IVRC). Twenty-nine states have joined that program.75 ... The Commission endorses state programs to share data and to collaborate in the synchronization of voter lists so that the states, on their own initiative, come as close as possible to creating an accurate database of the eligible electorate. The Commission recommends that these programs be structured to consolidate and integrate all compatible functions. Such projects should strive to improve the accuracy of voter registration records, enhance the ability to detect ineligible voting and prosecute voter fraud, reduce administrative costs, and increase registration rates. Doing so will help achieve management efficiencies and enhance these programs' appeal to the states that have yet to join in these collaborative ventures. Thus far, programs of this kind have shown the ability to safeguard any voter information they receive.78 www.nased.org (emphasis original)
So, there's some facts that you will ignore.

Drudge Retort
 

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable