by Kent Scheidegger · Sep 3, 2020 2:13 pm
The Supreme Court and the judiciary were barely mentioned at the Democratic National Convention, says Ilya Shapiro in this op-ed in the WSJ. That non-event does seem to be a “curious incident,” to borrow Sherlock Holmes’s famous observation in The Adventure of Silver Blaze. Continue reading . . .
by Kent Scheidegger · Sep 2, 2020 10:00 am
In California today, people of sense breathe a sigh of relief when the Legislature adjourns for the year. In public safety, particularly, that body now passes much harmful legislation and very little that helps.
Christine Mai-Duc and Alejandro Lazo report in the WSJ that anti-police activists are disappointed that the Legislature adjourned without passing much in the way of what they call “police reform.” We can all exhale now. Continue reading . . .
by Bill Otis · Sep 1, 2020 12:39 pm
Bret Stephens is an especially insightful writer for, of all things, the New York Times. His column yesterday asks some questions the country very much needs to ponder:
Can the left be honest that the tragedies unfolding today in American cities are as much the story of insufficient policing as they are of abusive policing? Does it get that “law and order” is a precondition to civil liberty, not an impediment to it? Is it willing to say that the American founders who bequeathed us the institutions of liberal democracy should be honored, not despised? And does Joe Biden have the nerve to stand up to the extremes in his own party, or does he just mean to appease them?
His piece makes other painful points as well.
by Bill Otis · Aug 30, 2020 2:25 pm
Joe Biden’s stance on capital punishment is short and to the point: “Abolish the death penalty at the federal level, and incentivize states to follow the federal government’s example.” See his Policy Statement, summarized here.
And it’s true that support for the death penalty has been falling since about the mid-Nineties, at least until a couple of years ago. But Mr. Biden is still missing the point, politically as well as morally.
by Kym Stapleton · Aug 24, 2020 1:57 pm
In re Humphrey (S247278) has been fully briefed and pending before the California Supreme Court for almost two years. As a general rule, a published Court of Appeal opinion has “no binding or precedential effect” while review is pending (Calif. Rules of Court 8.1115(e)(1)). The California Supreme Court, however, may so order otherwise (Calif. Rules of Court 8.1115(e)(3)). As reported by Bob Egelko of the San Francisco Chronicle, last week, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra asked the court to utilize its authority to reclassify the Court of Appeal’s opinion as “binding and precedential” while the case is pending review. Becerra claims that the issue of keeping people incarcerated due to “their inability to afford bail has become critically important because of ‘the unexpected change in circumstances caused by the unprecedented impacts of the novel coronavirus pandemic.'”
Kenneth Humphrey, a repeat offender, was charged with robbery and burglary. Bail was initially set at $600,000, then later reduced to $350,000. Humphrey’s request for pretrial release on his own recognizance without financial conditions was denied by the trial court. The Court of Appeal decision granted Humphrey a new bail hearing in which inquiry must be made on his ability to pay money bail. If unable to pay money bail, non-monetary alternatives must be addressed. CJLF filed an amicus brief in the case that can be found here.
by Bill Otis · Aug 21, 2020 8:13 pm
It’s not a secret that the Democratic National Convention was scripted to showcase Joe Biden’s stance on the issues (just as the RNC will be scripted to showcase Donald Trump’s). Thus it’s more than a little revealing that the person chosen to do a short slot reading the Preamble to the Constitution was Ms. Donna Hylton. Ms. Hylton was previously most notable for being a a convicted murderer and kidnapper implicated in a gruesome 1985 torture-killing.
Want to know what “criminal justice reform” is actually about? I’m grateful that the organizers of the DNC were forthcoming enough to give us this insight.
by Kent Scheidegger · Aug 20, 2020 10:07 am
Acting U.S. Attorney for SDNY Audrey Strauss announced today that leaders of the “We Build The Wall” online fundraising campaign, including Steve Bannon, have been charged with fraud. The WSJ has this story.
by Bill Otis · Jul 28, 2020 1:14 pm
Georgetown is a popular and lively part of Washington, DC with quite a few bars and upscale restaurants. It attracts college students and young adults on the way up. A resident of nearby Northern Virginia and a friend of mine, Prof. David Bernstein of Antonin Scalia Law School, posted yesterday about a revealing episode on a Georgetown street — an episode relevant to this blog and beyond.
by Bill Otis · Jul 15, 2020 6:03 am
Former Attorney General and US Senator Jeff Sessions yesterday lost his bid to return to the Senate when he was defeated in the Alabama Republican primary. In my view, Sessions was one of the very best members of Congress in standing up for sober criminal justice policies. He did this for most of his public life, starting in 1975 when he became an Assistant US Attorney for the Southern District of Alabama. In 1981, President Reagan appointed him to be US Attorney; in 1994, he was elected Attorney General of Alabama, and two years later, he handily won a Senate seat. He served in the Senate until President Trump appointed him Attorney General in February 2017. He resigned, at the President’s insistence, 20 months later.
Although Sessions’ contributions to sound criminal justice policy were substantial to say the least, they are not, in my view, the reason for which his public service should best be remembered.
by Bill Otis · Jul 10, 2020 7:05 pm
The President today commuted Roger Stone’s 40-month prison sentence, which he was to start serving shortly. As I noted in my earlier post on the Stone sentencing, Mr. Stone seemed to me to be a lifelong blowhard and bully. He was convicted on ample evidence of witness tampering. The line prosecutors (members of the Mueller team) recommended a sentence of seven to nine years. Their superiors at DOJ thought that excessive, and changed the recommendation to roughly three to four years. The sentencing judge, an Obama appointee, apparently agreed with the superseding, more lenient recommendation.
There was much debate about whether the lighter recommendation was merely political genuflection to the President’s wishes, or was instead, and as I believe, justified on the merits of the Department’s assessment of the Sentencing Guidelines. But that debate will seem tame compared to the one about to begin about today’s commutation.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED