Skip to the content
Looking at today's world
The world as we see it.
  • Americans Yawn at CDC Warnings About ‘Tripledemic’ — I Wonder Why?
  • Americans Yawn at CDC Warnings About ‘Tripledemic’ — I Wonder Why?

Tag: The law

Categories
Commentary Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics The Law

Do you believe a real live lawyer or someone who did a law students homework for ten years?

  • Post author By MC
  • Post date March 13, 2025
  • 1 Comment on Do you believe a real live lawyer or someone who did a law students homework for ten years?
McCarthy reporting on the prosecution of Donald Trump in New York

Do you believe a real live lawyer or someone who did a law students homework for ten years.

There’s websites and lawyer wanna be’s who give baseless opinions on what they think the law is. Here’s Andrew McCarthy’s legal opinion on the Muslim terrorist who the government wants to deport.

McCarthy served as an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York. He led the terrorism prosecution against Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman and eleven others. The defendants were convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and planning a series of attacks against New York City landmarks. He also contributed to the prosecutions of terrorists who bombed United States embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

If a person is credibly accused of crimes like extortion, there is no legal prohibition against using speech as evidence of those crimes. And if a person is credibly accused of conspiracy, there is no legal bar against presenting the conspirators’ association with each other as evidence that they were joint participants in a criminal agreement.

Keep that in mind. We’re already hearing twaddle about the First Amendment from apologists for Khalil, the Syria-born former Columbia University student. He claims Palestinian heritage and the Trump administration is seeking to deport him over his role in campus uprisings driven by his support for Hamas – which has been formally designated a terrorist organization under U.S. law for nearly 30 years.

In a nutshell, the defense goes like this. Khalil is a lawful permanent resident alien (LPR), a green-card holder. As a matter of law, that makes him a U.S. person whose rights approximate those of an American citizen. Ergo, he cannot lawfully be expelled from the United States for constitutionally protected conduct – his association with other pro-Hamas student agitators and his speech on their behalf as a “mediator” in interactions with Columbia’s administration.

Now, there are a number of legal flaws in this defense (I’ve outlined them in this National Review essay). While the rights of LPRs are similar to those of American citizens, they are not identical. LPRs are still aliens. Federal immigration law has long provided that aliens can be deported over criminal conduct, terrorist support, and national security concerns – something that cannot be done to U.S. citizens.

But I want to take issue with the basic premise that Khalil’s conduct was nothing more than constitutionally protected speech and association for which no American would face legal consequences.

Khalil is not subject to deportation because he is a Muslim or because he is deeply opposed to Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. His political speech and association with like-minded students (whether Muslims or non-Muslims) are not the point – even if he and his supporters would have you believe they’re the only point.

When he “mediated” on behalf of campus agitators – who had set up an illegal encampment blocking other students from tending to their studies and normal campus life, and who had illegally occupied and vandalized university buildings – he wasn’t engaged in political speech. He was pressuring the university to make concessions to the agitators’ pro-Hamas demands, with the understanding that if the administration did not capitulate, more and worse damage would be done on campus.

That’s not political speech. It’s extortion. American citizens who engaged in such behavior would not have a First Amendment defense. They’d likely face prosecution – and, in fact, dozens of the agitators were arrested in connection with these activities, and may still face other legal consequences.

Khalil does not present a profound constitutional controversy. His case is about the authority of the government, which is responsible for the security of its citizens, to deport aliens – even LPRs – who endanger us. That authority is etched in the Constitution, as well as the immigration and criminal laws of the United States.

The complete article can be found here.

18k

SHARES

ShareTweet

Pass it on.

  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
  • Tweet
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
Like Loading...
  • Tags The law

Categories
Commentary Opinion The Law

Where do you go for answers to legal questions?

  • Post author By MC
  • Post date October 3, 2023
  • No Comments on Where do you go for answers to legal questions?
Doing someone's homework doesn't qualify.

Where do you go for answers to legal questions? I tend to use a variety of sources. Law books are worthless unless you’re a college student. Case Law now that’s different. I know a loon is going to say there’s no difference. With Case Law you see what’s been decided in similar situations. Watching CNN or MSNBC lawyers or Academia is a joke.

Academia who has never practiced law or been in a courtroom rarely will have the answers. Why anyone listens to them, is beyond me. Many of them and former prosecutors you see on TV, will agree with the host interviewing them.

When It comes to individual sources on legal questions, I like to use a friend of mine who’s a lawyer and has the highest degree a lawyer can get. The Doctor of Juridical Science (SJD). I also have a family member who’s a Federal Judge.  And I myself having been a police officer who also testified as a witness for and against prosecutors.

And no, someone who filed for bankruptcy, and does someone elses homework doesn’t qualify as a source to use when it comes to the law.

 

9k
SHARES
ShareTweet

Pass it on.

  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
  • Tweet
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
Like Loading...
  • Tags The go to sources, The law

Categories
Biden Cartel Corruption Government Overreach Links from other news sources. The Courts The Law

Show them all. All the Trump circus shows should be televised.

  • Post author By MC
  • Post date August 9, 2023
  • No Comments on Show them all. All the Trump circus shows should be televised.
America agrees. This is all political. GP Photo.

Show them all. All the Trump circus shows should be televised. Democrats in the House are calling for the trial about the much to do about nothing mostly peaceful gathering be televised.

I say televise them all. Let the American people see what kind of affirmative action judges and DA’S that are out there.

11k

SHARES

ShareTweet

Pass it on.

  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
  • Tweet
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
Like Loading...
  • Tags Courts, The law

Categories
Daily Hits. Links from other news sources. Reprints from others. Stupid things people say or do. The Law

And he was a lawyer? “putting patients in charge of their own surgeries? Clients in charge of their own trials?” Swalwell declared: “Please tell me what I’m missing here

  • Post author By MC
  • Post date November 15, 2022
  • No Comments on And he was a lawyer? “putting patients in charge of their own surgeries? Clients in charge of their own trials?” Swalwell declared: “Please tell me what I’m missing here
Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., listens as Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., speaks during a news conference on the introduction of their Protection from Abusive Passengers Act at the U.S. Capitol Building on April 6, 2022 in Washington. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images) (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

First I’m not and never have been a lawyer. But having been in law enforcement and been involved in several lawsuits tells me that Swalwell made the right choice getting out of the legal field cause he has no clue. Jonathan Turley sets him straight.

Jonathan Turley

By Jonathan Turley | Fox News

 

 

The fault lines for the 2024 elections are already taking shape with the two parties in diametrically opposed positions and there is no greater divide than over parental rights. That stark difference was no more evident than in a tweet from Rep. Eric Swalwell who mocked the notion of parents making major decisions in the education of their children. 

The California Democrat insisted that it is akin to “putting patients in charge of their own surgeries? Clients in charge of their own trials?” Swalwell declared: “Please tell me what I’m missing here … This is so stupid.”

What Rep. Swalwell, a lawyer, is missing is called informed consent. Since he asked for assistance, let’s deal with each in turn.

Patients and medical consent

American torts have long required consent in medical torts. Indeed, what Swalwell seemed to suggest would be battery for doctors to make the key decisions over surgical goals or purposes. Indeed, even when doctors secured consent to operate on one ear, it was still considered battery when they decided in the operation to address the other ear in the best interests of the patient. Mohr v. Williams (Minn. 1905).

In Canterbury v. Spence the court rejected claims that a physician can make key decisions given “the patient’s right of self-determination.” Thus, doctors in the United States do have to secure the consent of patients in what they intend to do in surgeries or other medical procedures. (There are narrow exceptions such things as “substituted consent” or emergencies that do not apply here).

Ironically, California has one of the strongest patient-based consent rules. As the California Supreme Court stated in Cobbs v. Grant (1972): “Unlimited discretion in the physician is irreconcilable with the basic right of the patient to make the ultimate informed decision regarding the course of treatment to which he knowledgeably consents to be subjected.”

While obviously a patient cannot direct an operation itself, the doctor is expected to explain and secure the consent of the patient in what a surgery will attempt and how it will be accomplished. That is precisely what parents are demanding in looking at the subjects and books being taught in school. Moreover, that is precisely the role of school boards, which has historically exercised concurrent authority over the schools with the teachers hired under the school board-approved budgets.

Clients and legal consent

Swalwell is also wrong in suggesting that clients are not in charge of their own trials. Not only must attorneys secure the consent of their clients on what will be argued in trial, but they can be removed by their clients for failure to adequately represent their interests. It would be malpractice for a lawyer to tell a client, as suggested by Swalwell, that they do not control the major decisions in their own cases.

Ironically, the informed consent under defined in the Model Rules of Professional Conduct as the “agreement by a person to a proposed course of conduct after the lawyer has communicated adequate information and explanation about the material risks of and reasonably available alternatives to the proposed course of conduct”).

Obviously, lawyers must follow their own ethical and professional judgment in trials, and tactical choices are generally left up to the lawyers. However, the main objectives of the trial remain for the client to “knowingly and voluntarily assume” Metrick v. Chatz (Ill. App. Ct. 1994).

Much like the claim of parents, clients demand the right to reject a plan for trial and the arguments or means to be used at trial. This right of consent is ongoing and can be exercised at any point in the litigation.

Informed consent

Of course, the key to informed consent is that parents are given the information needed to secure their consent. School districts have been resisting such disclosures and pushing back on parental opposition to major curriculum or policy decisions.

What is most striking about Swalwell’s reference to patients and clients is that they, under his educational approach, have far more voice in a wart removal or a parking ticket challenge than the education of their children. If anything, his analogies support the call for greater parental knowledge and consent.

In other words, “what is missing here” is that Rep. Swalwell’s interpretation could constitute both medical and legal malpractice. It may also constitute political malpractice as both parties now careen toward the 2024 elections.

 

30.1k

SHARES

ShareTweet

Pass it on.

  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
  • Tweet
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
Like Loading...
  • Tags The law

Recent

  • Progressive Democrat Arabs take over Columbia Main Library. May 8, 2025
  • Trump Orders Curb on Virus Research. And that’s a good thing. May 6, 2025
  • Right to Due Process. How we solve this. May 6, 2025
  • DC Court Bitch slaps local Federal Judge. Again. May 4, 2025
  • Spending money in the USA. 49 major investments from prominent companies in a wide swath of sectors, including tech, pharmaceuticals, energy, and more. May 4, 2025

Categories

  • Abortion rights?
  • Affirmative Action
  • America's Heartland
  • Anti Semitic
  • Back Door Power Grab
  • bankruptcy
  • Biden
  • Biden Cartel
  • Biden Pandemic
  • Bird Flu
  • Black Supremacy
  • California fires.
  • California.
  • Censorship
  • Child Abuse
  • China
  • Climate "change"
  • Columbian Justice.
  • Commentary
  • Conservative Media
  • Corruption
  • Court Overreach
  • Court overreach.
  • COVID
  • Crime
  • Daily Hits.
  • Debates
  • DEI
  • Democrat
  • DOGE
  • Drugs
  • Economy
  • Education
  • Elections
  • Emotional abuse
  • Energy
  • Europe
  • EV
  • Facebook
  • Faked news
  • Florida
  • Food
  • Foreign Aid
  • Free Speech
  • Government Overhaul
  • Government Overreach
  • Government Waste.
  • Green Energy
  • Gun Control
  • Harris
  • Harris Cartel
  • Hate
  • Headline News
  • History
  • House
  • How funny is this?
  • How sick is this?
  • Human Traficking
  • Illegals
  • Immigration
  • Inflation
  • Insurrection
  • Israel
  • January 6
  • Journalism.
  • Just my own thoughts
  • Latinos
  • Lawfare
  • Leftist Virtue(!)
  • Lies
  • Life
  • Links from other news sources.
  • Loser
  • Media Woke
  • Medicade
  • Medicare
  • Medicine
  • Military Woke
  • Movies-TV.
  • MSM
  • Music
  • New York
  • Opinion
  • Parler
  • Plagiarism
  • Poetic Justice
  • Politics
  • Polls
  • Privacy
  • Pro Life
  • Progressive Racism
  • Public Service Announcement
  • Race Baiter
  • Racism
  • Racism.
  • Recession?
  • Reprints from others.
  • Riots
  • Satire
  • Science
  • Senate
  • Sexual Abuse
  • Short and Sweet.
  • Social Venues-Twitter
  • Social Venues-Twitter
  • Sports
  • Sports-Entertainment
  • Stupid things people say or do.
  • Tariffs
  • Taxes
  • Team MAGA
  • Terrorism
  • The Border
  • The Courts
  • The Funnies.
  • The Law
  • theft in office.
  • Tony the Fauch
  • Traitors
  • Transgender
  • Trump
  • Un documented.
  • Uncategorized
  • Undocumented
  • Unions
  • Vaccines
  • Violence
  • Voter Fraud
  • Warfare
  • Weaponization of Government.
  • White Progressive Supremacy
  • Winning
  • WOKE
  • Work Place
  • World Stage

Archives

Categories

CC

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Warning

Any threats especially to law enforcement or politicians will get you banned

© 2025 Looking at today's world

Powered by WordPress

To the top ↑ Up ↑
%d