- “A Link Between Alcohol and Cancer? It’s Not Nearly as Scary as It Seems” [Aaron E. Carroll, New York Times; Ronald Bailey]
- Court rejects “sovereign citizen” pitch on behalf of disgraced Subway pitchman Jared Fogle [Matt Reynolds, Courthouse News]
- I’m quoted on U.S. Senate’s Roy Moore perplex [Matt Kwong, CBC] And my Twitter thread on the signed yearbook that figures in Monday’s allegations went viral;
- Time to end it: “Low-Income Housing Tax Credit: Costly, Complex, and Corruption-Prone” [Chris Edwards and Vanessa Brown Calder, Cato]
- “When Statutes Conflict, Agencies Shouldn’t Get to Pick Which One They Like More” [Ilya Shapiro, Cato on Cato certiorari amicus in Chevron deference case of Perez-Guzman v. Sessions]
- “More Lawyers or More Justice?” Mark Pulliam reviews Barton and Bibas’s Rebooting Justice, earlier here and here]
9 Comments
Since they have never identified the cause of Cancer, I’ve always found it strange that they can say that something causes Cancer.
The mechanism of general anesthesia is unknown*. So I find it strange that they say that something causes general anesthesia.
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_general_anaesthetic_action
the first link “Aaron E. Carroll, New York Times” appears to be broken.
Bad link for the NYT cancer article. Thanks!
Ouch, my mistake. Fixed now.
Did Mr. Fogle have to agree or cooperate in any way for that “Jailhouse Lawyer” to file a motion on his behalf?
From the first line of the decision –
“Defendant Jared Fogle’s frivolous pro se Motion to Correct Clear Error Pursuant to Rule
52(b), Dkt [110], is denied.”
Pro Se.
Enough said
Even prisoners have access to legal research tools, don’t they? You’d think that he’d be able to look up “sovereign citizen” and see that courts have consistently rejected it.
The judge certainly characterized it as a sovereign citizen argument.
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/JaredFogle.pdf
However, if you ask me, the only line quoted from the motion doesn’t support that.
Here is the quoted line.
“whether a judicial judgment is lawful depends on whether the sovereign has authority to render it.”
Here is what the judge followed that line up with in his decision.
“If Fogle is now claiming to be “sovereign”, the Seventh Circuit has rejected theories of individual sovereignty, immunity from prosecution, and their ilk.”
While the filing by Frank Edwin Pate may or may not make a sovereign citizen type argument, nothing in the text quoted from the brief supports that contention or the suggestion that Fogle is claiming to be “sovereign”..