Monthly Archive: February 2022

Predicting the Path of the New Justice

Ruth Marcus has this column in the WaPo (behind a paywall) on the impact of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson on the Supreme Court. Ms. Marcus has covered the high court for many years.

In addition, justices, male or female, aren’t fungible. Even if they can be placed into broad categories of liberal or conservative, they bring different passions and different life experiences to the bench. Jackson’s experience as a criminal defense lawyer, member of the U.S. Sentencing Commission and trial court judge gives her a perspective different from that of her colleagues. It’s reasonable to imagine Jackson emerging as an ally of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, especially on criminal law issues, where Breyer and Justice Elena Kagan have been slightly more moderate. And, as I wrote the other day, she also could emerge as another powerful voice in dissent, joining Sotomayor and Kagan in a forcefulness and passion that Breyer didn’t always display. Continue reading . . .

The Road to Hell

In the struggle to achieve racial justice, New York and California have set the pace for the rest of America.  Over the past several years the Governors, state legislatures and Attorneys General of both states have promoted and implemented criminal justice reforms attempting to create equal outcomes among “marginalized racial groups.”  To create equity both states have effectively decriminalized certain offenses deemed non-violent, such as selling illegal drugs on the street, using drugs, traffic offenses, drunk driving, most theft, vandalism, some domestic violence, assaults, resisting arrest and illegal firearms possession.  Bail has also been eliminated or sharply reduced for all but the most violent offenses including car theft, commercial burglary, strong armed robbery and vehicular manslaughter among others.  Progressives tell us that reducing the arrest, prosecution and punishment for these crimes is necessary because people of color are disproportionately targeted by America’s systemically racist criminal justice system for committing them.   This is the kind of one-dimensional reasoning children use.  New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exhibited it Monday, opining that the spike in crime in her state is because “the child-tax credit just ran out, on December 31st, and now people are stealing baby formula.”  She has 12 million followers on twitter.

Continue reading . . .

The Diversity Scam

It’s not news at this point that President Biden preemptively determined that he would exclude close to 95% of the population in looking for his first Supreme Court nominee, and restrict the search solely to black women.  Excluding almost everyone in advance is a remarkably stupid way to go about making critical SCOTUS appointments, as three quarters of the electorate took little to time figure out.  The excuse being given for the blanket exclusion of black men, white men, white women, Hispanics, Asian-Americans and anyone else you can think of is  —  ready now?  —  diversity.

That this is preposterous on its face is not the point I want to make, since that’s too obvious to be posting about.  Instead, the point worth noting is that, according to one quite prominent leader in Washington, DC, it’s not really about diversity at all.

Continue reading . . .

Progressive NY District Attorney Changing His Tune

Alvin Bragg, the new Manhattan District Attorney who began the year promising not to prosecute property criminals did a 180 last week and says he will now get tough on thieves.  As reported by Tamar Lapin in the New York Post, after video of a thief walking out of a Trader Joe’s with an armful of steaks was released, Bragg told reporters “We have amongst us opportunists, who are repeat players, who are just taking goods…..We are brainstorming about how to respond to that.”  Brainstorming?  How about enforcing theft laws and giving jail sentences to repeaters?  How about getting rid of zero bail and holding thieves accountable?  None of this require much deep thinking.  A brief look at recent history indicates that consequences matter.  Holding property offenders and other so-call “low level” criminals accountable also helps reduce violent crime.  Many of the violent crimes occurring in cities run by progressive politicians are committed by repeat offenders who would have been in jail or prison prior to the “reforms” pushed by these politicians and groups like Black Lives Matter.  The Seattle man who clocked a woman with a baseball bat in broad daylight last week was one of those “low level” offenders progressives policies kept on the streets.

Blaming Guns For Rising Crime

With America experiencing the largest single-year increase in homicide ever recorded in 2020, and data indicating another double-digit increase last year, it appears that many politicians including the president are confused about the cause.  During a New York  visit with the Mayor Eric Adams last week, President Biden pledged to address the city’s out-of-control crime with help in getting illegal guns off the streets.  Adams, a former cop, along with mayors in Baltimore, DC, Oakland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, and St. Louis among others believe the most effective approach to violent and property crime is to try and remove guns from the hands of criminals.  Rebecca Rosenberg of Fox News has this piece discussing the fallacy of focusing on the weapon rather than the progressive policies that have enabled criminals to stay on the streets and prey upon the public.   Cully Stimson, a former prosecutor and senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation calls the focus on “gun crimes” a red herring.

Continue reading . . .

Wealthy Hollywood Liberals Funding Gascón Recall

In 2019 rich liberals, most of whom do not live in Southern California, including George Soros (New York), Patty Quillin  & husband Reed Hastings (San Francisco), Elizabeth Simons (San Francisco), M. Quinn Delaney (Oakland), Cari Tuna (San Francisco), Susan Pritzker (Oakland), Kaitlyn Krieger ( San Francisco), Nicole Shanahan (San Francisco), Dorianna Blitt (New York), Anne Devereux (New York), and Anne Rosenbaum Irwin (San Francisco), gave $12.4 million to George Gascón’s campaign for Los Angeles District Attorney.  Immediately after taking office, Gascón announced that he would not be prosecuting most property and drug criminals and that most arrestees would be released without bail. He also pledged to seek the shortest sentences possible for criminals convicted in Los Angeles County, including murderers, rapists and other violent offenders.  While progressive state sentencing reforms (read reductions) along with Governor Newsom’s pandemic emergency orders for inmate releases and zero bail had been fueling crime increases before Gascón was elected, his new policies exacerbated this trend.  The Los Angeles County Sheriff reports that homicides increased by 94% and auto thefts by 59% over the past two years.  News footage of the daily “smash and grab” robberies across LA and the recent Beverly Hills home invasion and murder of liberal philanthropist Jaqueline Avant and the brutal killing of UCLA student Brianna Kupfer in exclusive Hancock Park, both by habitual felons, was a reality check for LA area liberals.

Continue reading . . .

Mike Pence Stands Up for the Rule of Law in Federalist Society Speech

Like most Vice Presidents, Mike Pence was loyal to his superior while in office.  Of late, former President Trump and some of his more extreme allies have been touting the notion, hatched a bit more than a year ago, that Pence should have either refused to count the electoral votes that put Joe Biden in the White House, or have simply “counted” them in a way where Trump would have come out ahead.  Whether or not one views the last Presidential election as having had its episodes of fraud (what national election hasn’t to some degree?), there is no reasonable way to view that stance as consistent with the rule of law, or as anything but a dangerous deviation of how we do things in this country.

Today, speaking at the Federalist Society, Mike Pence gave his answer.  The Washington Post has the story.

Continue reading . . .

In California, Blanket Nonenforcement Policies Are Unconstitutional

Progressive California District Attorneys who have chosen not to prosecute offenders who commit so called “low level” crimes are violating the state Constitution according to Hasting’s law professor Zachary Price.  In a piece published in SCOCA blog, a joint project of the U.C. Berkeley and Hastings Schools of Law, Professor Price asserts that while district attorneys such as San Francisco’s Chesa Boudin and Los Angeles DA George Gascón ran for office promising not to prosecute drug users and small-time dealers, trespassers, shoplifters, traffic offenders and those resisting arrest among others, the state constitution

specifically limits local district attorney discretion by imposing an affirmative duty on California’s attorney general “to see that the laws of the State are uniformly and adequately enforced.” And although state law provides for elected district attorneys in each county and obligates them to “attend the courts, and within his or her discretion . . . initiate and conduct on behalf of the people all prosecutions for public offenses,” the state constitution requires supersession of local prosecutorial functions when the attorney general determines that local enforcement is inadequate.

Continue reading . . .

CA Law Authorizes Biased Jurors

A California law which took effect in January prohibits prosecutors from removing people who are biased against police officers from juries in criminal trials.  The California jury selection process in criminal cases allows the prosecutor and the defense attorney 10 peremptory challenges for most felony trials, and 20 each for capital cases.  Prior law allowed these challenges to be exercised for any reason other than solely on the potential juror’s race, which is unconstitutional.  AB 3070 Weber (D Los Angeles) signed into law by Governor Newsom in September of 2020, prohibits the use of a peremptory challenge to remove a juror who considers police and/or the criminal justice system racist.  The law also supports objections by defense attorneys if the prosecutor challenges potential jurors who are inattentive, incoherent or threatening.  In a courtroom with a impartial judge who allows a challenge to a gang member who admits that he hates cops, the removal of the gang member from the jury will now become grounds for appeal.  The law does not prevent defense attorneys from removing potential jurors who express support for law enforcement or have friends or relatives who are police officers, prosecutors or judges, or who have been victims of crime.  Essentially Governor Newsom has approved a law that eliminates the constitutional right of an impartial jury.  The bill’s author, Shirley Weber, was appointed in 2020 by Governor Newsom to serve as Secretary of State.  She is the person in charge of California elections.