Comments for Overlawyered Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Fri, 31 Oct 2014 18:33:36 +0000 hourly 1 Comment on George Will: the Wisconsin John Doe raids and the system’s legitimacy by Allan Fri, 31 Oct 2014 18:33:36 +0000 As for the Walker crackdown on demonstrators….

You say tomato, others say tomato (ok, it loses something when written instead of spoken).

Comment on George Will: the Wisconsin John Doe raids and the system’s legitimacy by Allan Fri, 31 Oct 2014 17:19:36 +0000 You are nitpicking. A crime is a crime is a crime.

Assume, for a second, that what Walker is accused of is a crime (I know, you might have to suspend disbelief).

Assume possession of marijuana is a crime.

Would a nighttime raid be ok for a marijuana raid, but not a raid on those accused of the crime of collaborating in political campaigns? Why? Perhaps you believe that someone who has an ounce of marijuana is more likely to be violent than a political operative. But, I submit, that is a very biased viewpoint.

Comment on Jury finds unlawful bias against one-armed security guard by D Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:34:20 +0000 Doesn’t the weapon count as his second arm? or does he have to wear two guns for that?

Comment on Update: court rules against Noriega “Call of Duty” suit by Hugo S. Cunningham Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:23:23 +0000 At the time Noriega was losing control, I expressed the hope that he could get asylum in Norway:

“Noriega a Noruega!”

Comment on George Will: the Wisconsin John Doe raids and the system’s legitimacy by Hugo S. Cunningham Fri, 31 Oct 2014 04:10:36 +0000 @Allan–

>[George Will falsely]
> makes it seem as if Walker and his cronies have been singled out in a >manner that is not commonplace. The nighttime raids are part and >parcel of the >police state.

In peacetime democracies, such raids normally target criminal activities only, not the mere dissemination of peaceable political speech (aka “the press”).

Please cite a recent nighttime raid condoned by the likes of Scott Walker and George Will that is comparably offensive.

Comment on George Will: the Wisconsin John Doe raids and the system’s legitimacy by Hugo S. Cunningham Fri, 31 Oct 2014 03:55:12 +0000 @Allan–

[Ref Scott Walker]
>trying to close down the Wisconsin capitol when there were >demonstrations, arguably in violation of the Wisconsin constitution.


>[Scott Walker tried]
>to close down the Wisconsin capitol when there were demonstrations,
>arguably in violation of the Wisconsin constitution.

My impression is that these were not peaceable assemblies in front of the capitol to rally opposition to the policies of Scott Walker and the Republican legislature, but rather physical obstructions inside the capitol to prevent legislators from doing the job they were elected to do. In a representative democracy, this comes closer to “rebellion” than “peaceable assembly,” though obviously demanding a milder response than an armed assault would.

In a representative democracy, the proper response to legislators ignoring your wishes (provided they stay within Constitutional and democratic limits) is to campaign for their defeat at the next election. That is more difficult, however, if DAs can break into your home at night for transparently political reasons.

Comment on “Detroit man fights $30k child support bill for kid that is not his” by Texjudge Thu, 30 Oct 2014 23:21:44 +0000 I have an even worse one. Back in the 1990s in West Texas a man found out, after one of his boys was being checked for a genetic disorder, that he was not the biological father of ANY of his 3 children. It turned out that his spouse had all three of them with some other guy. Unfortunately for the cuckolded husband, the law in Texas at the time was that you had to support any child born during the marriage even if proven not to be yours. This was bases on old English common law formulated well before DNA testing. I recall the courts were sympathetic to this man but stated it was up to the Legislature to fix things.

Comment on Experimental drugs, terminal patients, and “right to try” statutes by jdgalt Thu, 30 Oct 2014 23:09:40 +0000 The only reason “preemption” is a problem is because the wrongful Wickard v. Filburn precedent still stands. Changing that (by changing the Supreme Court) needs to be top priority for the next administration. If Obama is willing to threaten to pack the court (as he has), the next admin MUST be willing to actually do it if necessary. Let’s bring the Constitution back from exile and save our nation! It’s been long enough!

Comment on Politics roundup by Bill Poser Thu, 30 Oct 2014 19:38:48 +0000 The Gregg Abbott case does raise one interesting issue: if liability was clear, the injury to Abbott was clear and severe, and both defendants had sufficient insurance, how did Abbott incur legal fees of $2 million?

Comment on Our public servants by John Thu, 30 Oct 2014 16:15:56 +0000 The article says that the union’s complaint is that in the most recent collective bargaining agreement those records are supposed to be destroyed after 7 years. Even if that’s true isn’t that just a grievance for the Union to file not a reason to stop the release of the information?