President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Baron Scicluna · Jun 5, 2018

QYFW said: ↑

YOU MADE A POST THAT DIDN'T SAY EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING AND EVEN THOUGH I TOTALLY AGREE WITH ONE OF THE POINTS (WHICH I WILL COMPLETELY IGNORE) I WILL DISMISS IT OUT OF HAND BECAUSE I AM SUPPOSED TO AAAARRRGGGHHHH IT'S SO FRUSTRATING THAT YOU DON'T SEE THE WORLD EXACTLY LIKE I DO HOW DARE YOU HAVE SUCH THOUGHTS AND EXPRESS THEM I HATE WHEN PEOPLE ARE LIKE THAT WHAT A PARTISAN ASSHOLE YOU ARE FUCK WHY CAN'T WE HAVE AN HONEST DEBATE ON IMPORTANT ISSUES
Click to expand...

Tell us how you really feel.

outofplace · Jun 5, 2018

YankeeFan said: ↑

Double Jeopardy Loophole. That’s a good one.

Would love to see Dems argue for getting rid of that. It’s only been a bedrock of American jurice prudence since the nation’s founding.
Click to expand...

Tradition matters unless Donald Trump wants to throw it out. If President Trump wants it gone, it needs to go!

Also, it was one person talking about it, but of course you want to pin it on all Democrats everywhere and you want to ignore that it is inspired by President Trump's use of pardons for political reasons.

DanielSimpsonDay · Jun 5, 2018

QYFW said: ↑

YOU MADE A POST THAT DIDN'T SAY EXACTLY WHAT I WAS THINKING AND EVEN THOUGH I TOTALLY AGREE WITH ONE OF THE POINTS (WHICH I WILL COMPLETELY IGNORE) I WILL DISMISS IT OUT OF HAND BECAUSE I AM SUPPOSED TO AAAARRRGGGHHHH IT'S SO FRUSTRATING THAT YOU DON'T SEE THE WORLD EXACTLY LIKE I DO HOW DARE YOU HAVE SUCH THOUGHTS AND EXPRESS THEM I HATE WHEN PEOPLE ARE LIKE THAT WHAT A PARTISAN ASSHOLE YOU ARE FUCK WHY CAN'T WE HAVE AN HONEST DEBATE ON IMPORTANT ISSUES
Click to expand...

#BeBest

Neutral Corner · Jun 5, 2018

HanSenSE said: ↑

Press aide who mocked McCain is out at the White House
Click to expand...

I'm glad she's out - but you know damn well it had nothing to do with what she said about McCain. She locked horns with Mercedes Schlapp and lost.

Smallpotatoes · Jun 5, 2018

David Hogg "SWATted": Police respond to home of Parkland shooting survivor's family, apparently victim of prank - CBS News

David Hogg's house was swatted.

Why are people so pissed off at him? I just don't understand.

Neutral Corner · Jun 5, 2018

Slacker said: ↑

I think it has something to do with jurice prudence. I'm a little rusty on legal terms, but YF can catch you up on that.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with jurist prudence? Don't we want prudent judges?

outofplace · Jun 5, 2018

melock said: ↑

Click to expand...

The NRA and Betsy DeVos. There is a marriage made in hell.

garrow · Jun 5, 2018

Elizabeth Drew:

Trump’s Saturday Night Massacre Has Already Begun

Neutral Corner · Jun 5, 2018

Nice to see that old fashioned bribery is still effective in D.C.

lcjjdnh · Jun 5, 2018

YankeeFan said: ↑

Double Jeopardy Loophole. That’s a good one.

Would love to see Dems argue for getting rid of that. It’s only been a bedrock of American jurice prudence since the nation’s founding.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...not quite. The issue is not double jeopardy, generally. The issue is how it applies to prosecutions by separate sovereigns—here, the federal and state governments. It is fairly well established that the constitution does not prohibit them from prosecuting over the same offense. The issue is that N.Y. has a statute that prohibits it.

From a recent SCOTUS opinion.

This case involves the dual-sovereignty carve-out from the Double Jeopardy Clause. The ordinary rule under that Clause is that a person cannot be prosecuted twice for the same offense. See U.S. Const., Amdt. 5 ("nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb").1 But two prosecutions, this Court has long held, are not for the same offense if brought by different sovereigns — even when those actions target the identical criminal conduct through equivalent criminal laws. See, e.g., United States v. Lanza, 260 U.S. 377, 382, 43 S.Ct. 141, 67 S.Ct. 314 (1922). As we have put the point: "[W]hen the same act transgresses the laws of two sovereigns, it cannot be truly averred that the offender has been twice punished for the same offence; but only that by one act he has committed two offences." Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82, 88, 106 S.Ct. 433, 88 L.Ed.2d 387 (1985) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Double Jeopardy Clause thus drops out of the picture when the "entities that seek successively to prosecute a defendant for the same course of conduct [are] separate sovereigns." Ibid.

Truth be told, however, "sovereignty" in this context does not bear its ordinary meaning. For whatever reason, the test we have devised to decide whether two governments are distinct for double jeopardy purposes overtly disregards common indicia of sovereignty. Under that standard, we do not examine the "extent of control" that "one prosecuting authority [wields] over the other." Wheeler, 435 U.S., at 320, 98 S.Ct. 1079. The degree to which an entity exercises self-governance — whether autonomously managing its own affairs or continually submitting to outside direction — plays no role in the analysis. See Shell Co., 302 U.S., at 261-262, 264-266, 58 S.Ct. 167. Nor do we care about a government's more particular ability to enact and enforce its own criminal laws. See Waller v. Florida, 397 U.S. 387, 391-395, 90 S.Ct. 1184, 25 L.Ed.2d 435 (1970). In short, the inquiry (despite its label) does not probe whether a government possesses the usual attributes, or acts in the common manner, of a sovereign entity.2

[136 S.Ct. 1871]

Rather, as Puerto Rico itself acknowledges, our test hinges on a single criterion: the "ultimate source" of the power undergirding the respective prosecutions. Wheeler, 435 U.S., at 320, 98 S.Ct. 1079; see Brief for Petitioner 26. Whether two prosecuting entities are dual sovereigns in the double jeopardy context, we have stated, depends on "whether [they] draw their authority to punish the offender from distinct sources of power." Heath, 474 U.S., at 88, 106 S.Ct. 433. The inquiry is thus historical, not functional — looking at the deepest wellsprings, not the current exercise, of prosecutorial authority. If two entities derive their power to punish from wholly independent sources (imagine here a pair of parallel lines), then they may bring successive prosecutions. Conversely, if those entities draw their power from the same ultimate source (imagine now two lines emerging from a common point, even if later diverging), then they may not.3

Under that approach, the States are separate sovereigns from the Federal Government (and from one another). See Abbate v. United States, 359 U.S. 187, 195, 79 S.Ct. 666, 3 L.Ed.2d 729 (1959); Bartkus v. Illinois, 359 U.S. 121, 132-137, 79 S.Ct. 676, 3 L.Ed.2d 684 (1959); Heath, 474 U.S., at 88, 106 S.Ct. 433. The States' "powers to undertake criminal prosecutions," we have explained, do not "derive[ ]... from the Federal Government." Id., at 89, 106 S.Ct. 433. Instead, the States rely on "authority originally belonging to them before admission to the Union and preserved to them by the Tenth Amendment." Ibid.; see U.S. Const., Amdt. 10 ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution ... are reserved to the States"); Blatchford v. Native Village of Noatak, 501 U.S. 775, 779, 111 S.Ct. 2578, 115 L.Ed.2d 686 (1991) (noting that the States "entered the [Union] with their sovereignty intact"). Said otherwise: Prior to forming the Union, the States possessed "separate and independent sources of power and authority," which they continue to draw upon in enacting and enforcing criminal laws. Heath, 474 U.S., at 89, 106 S.Ct. 433. State prosecutions therefore have their most ancient roots in an "inherent sovereignty" unconnected to, and indeed pre-existing, the U.S. Congress. Ibid.4
Click to expand...

DanOregon · Jun 5, 2018

Anyone counting on the President for a pardon, or anything - should remember that he's on wife number three, has stiffed countless contractors and is a compulsive liar. His word is no good.

Neutral Corner · Jun 5, 2018

Log in or Sign up

President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

DanielSimpsonDay Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

garrow Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

DanOregon Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

DanielSimpsonDay Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

outofplace Well-Known Member

garrow Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

lcjjdnh Well-Known Member

DanOregon Well-Known Member

Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches