Republicans slammed for pushing 'transparently foolish excuses' to justify opposition to Ketanji Brown Jackson
April 4, 2022, 12:06 PM ET
For customer support contact
support@rawstory.com. Report typos and corrections to
corrections@rawstory.com.
Stories Chosen For You
A Boston federal judge has postponed a hearing regarding a lawsuit filed by a government workers’ union in an attempt to bolster President Joe Biden’s authority to invoke the 14th Amendment to override the debt ceiling, Politico reported.
“In deference to the efforts of the executive and legislative branches to resolve the current impasse over the debt ceiling statute, the court will postpone the hearing on [the union’s] motion for a preliminary injunction scheduled for this Wednesday, May 31, 2023, pending any further order of the court,” U.S. District Court Judge Richard Stearns wrote.
According to Politico, the suit comes after a filing by the Justice Department that sought to clarify whether the 14th Amendment authorizes or "even requires the president to keep paying U.S. government financial obligations in the face of a statute that seeks to set a limit on the total debt outstanding."
Biden has signaled that he may invoke the power of the 14th Amendment in the future but is worried that a court battle would be economically damaging.
“Because the X-date is now estimated to be June 5, and because Congress may pass legislation this week raising the Debt Limit, Defendants submit that proceeding on the current schedule would be unnecessarily burdensome and would waste both the parties’ and the Court’s resources,” Special Counsel Brad Rosenberg and other lawyers from Justice’s Civil Division wrote. “Indeed, the relief that Plaintiff seeks may be counterproductive in light of the agreement in principle that has been reached.”
Read the full report over at Politico.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Nevada legislature blocks governor approving guns to those convicted of hate crimes after prison
May 29, 2023
The Nevada Independent reported Monday that the state Senate passed a veto override of Gov. Joe Lombardo (R-NV), who blocked a set of gun safety laws that would stop those convicted of a hate crime in the last ten years from getting a gun.
There were three Democrat-proposed gun control measures, the report explained, and the GOP governor vetoed all of them.
“I will not support legislation that infringes on the constitutional rights of Nevadans,” Lombardo said in a release Wednesday. “As I stated in my letters, much of the legislation I vetoed today is in direct conflict with legal precedent and established constitutional protections. Therefore, I cannot support them.”
The other gun legislation would criminalize bringing a gun within 100 feet of an election site and a measure that would raise the legal age to purchase a semi-automatic rifle and shotgun to 21. That bill also sought to close legal loopholes that allow for so-called "ghost guns."
During the spring session, Democratic-led state legislatures have taken steps to pass gun safety legislation overwhelmingly supported by voters in the state. In Colorado, a member attempted to pass an assault weapons ban, but the Judiciary Committee voted it down 6-7.
Illinois passed and the governor signed a law that would make it illegal for anyone to knowingly possess an assault weapon, .50 caliber rifle or .50 caliber cartridge 300 days after the law is signed. It allows a carveout for any weapon registered with the Illinois State Police.
Washington state banned 60 different kinds of weapons and kits that can build such weapons or enhance legal guns.
Assemblywoman Sandra Jauregui, a Democrat, lamented she “desperately” wishes Lombardo would choose the lives of Nevada people over partisanship.
“After his time consoling the families of the 1 October massacre, I expected the governor to have the basic empathy to realize his responsibility to prevent future mass shootings and gun violence tragedies,” Jauregui said in a text message to the Independent. “I never want a Nevadan to experience the trauma that I and so many have endured.”
CONTINUE READING
Show less
'Morally right thing': Former Alabama governors urge their state to stop executing people
May 29, 2023
Former Republican Gov. Robert Bentley and Democratic Gov. Don Siegelman came together to pen a warning in the Washington Post last week imploring change over the death penalty. With 167, the state has more people on death row than any other per capita.
They called it "146 people too many."
"As former Alabama governors, we have come over time to see the flaws in our nation’s justice system and to view the state’s death penalty laws in particular as legally and morally troubling," the governors wrote. "We both presided over executions while in office, but if we had known then what we know now about prosecutorial misconduct, we would have exercised our constitutional authority to commute death sentences to life."
They cited data from the Death Penalty Information Center, which counted that for every 8.3 executions, there has been one person exonerated since 1976. It means they're putting people to death who weren't guilty about 12 percent of the time. Applying those statistics to Alabama means as many as 20 people shouldn't be there and were wrongfully convicted.
"The center has found that wrongful convictions are 'overwhelmingly the product of police or prosecutorial misconduct or the presentation of knowingly false testimony.' Judge Alex Kozinski, former chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, has said the withholding of exculpatory evidence by prosecutors is an 'epidemic' in the United States. Shamefully, such misconduct most frequently involves Black defendants (87 percent)," the column explained.
The governors cited one person in Alabama that has been exonerated, but they said there are more convictions that lawmakers should find concerning. They went so far as to say that those convictions should "haunt Alabama leaders."
"In 1998, a non-unanimous jury recommended death for Toforest Johnson for the killing of an off-duty sheriff’s deputy based on the testimony of someone who, unknown to the defense, was later paid a $5,000 reward," they recalled. "The case of Rocky Myers, convicted of murdering his neighbor, is even more disturbing. Myers was never connected to the murder scene, and even though the jury recommended life without parole, the judge overrode the recommendation and ordered his execution."
Siegelman mentioned Freddie Wright, who he could have commuted in 2000, but didn't. He said it haunts him. After 23 years, he's fairly certain that Wright was wrongfully charged, prosecuted, and convicted for a murder he likely didn't commit.
They also cited a 1976 Supreme Court ruling that opened the door for prosecutors to use grand juries to get convictions without any accountability for themselves. The joke has always been that a grand jury could indict a ham sandwich. It's not far off, as the governors cite close to a 99 percent indictment rate.
They described the "stealth setting" as a place without a judge or defense lawyers overseeing what prosecutors are doing. It gives them free rein to provide false evidence or testimony and withhold any evidence they want to get the conviction. The District Attorneys prosecutors work for are political officials, meaning their success rate becomes a campaign talking point. Convictions are seen as doing a good job.
Before the Supreme Court made that ruling, there were about 200,000 people that were incarcerated. After the 1976 ruling, it shot up to 1.6 million.
"In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that a unanimous verdict is required to convict someone of a capital crime warranting death. The court highlighted the racist underpinnings of non-unanimous verdicts as a Jim Crow practice dating from the 1870s," the governors explained.
"Alabama had been the only state to allow a person to be sentenced to death by this legal relic and has 115 people scheduled to die based on non-unanimous jury verdicts."
Under the guise of being "tough on crime," Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) recently signed a law allowing someone put to death in Florida on a jury vote of 8-4.
Alabama has banned judicial overrides, which allowed judges to bypass the jury and give whatever sentence they wanted. In the state, 7 percent of death sentences were from these kinds of judicial overrides. When the law was signed, it didn't help the 31 people on death row in the state that were already there because of the practice.
The men closed by saying that 146 people on death row in Alabama are there due to split juries or judicial overrides.
"We missed our chance to confront the death penalty and have lived to regret it, but it is not too late for today’s elected officials to do the morally right thing," they closed.
CONTINUE READING
Show less
Copyright © 2023 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | Manage Preferences
For corrections contact corrections@rawstory.com, for support contact support@rawstory.com.
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}