I have the honor of giving a keynote address to the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference in Anaheim, California this morning. The presentation at 10:30 am at the Marriott Anaheim is entitled “The Rise and Fall of Free Speech In the West.”
Created in 1891, the Ninth Circuit is far and away the largest of the 13 circuits with 29 active appellate judges. The circuit covers the following districts:
- District of Alaska
- District of Arizona
- Central District of California
- Eastern District of California
- Northern District of California
- Southern District of California
- District of Hawaii
- District of Idaho
- District of Montana
- District of Nevada
- District of Oregon
- Eastern District of Washington
- Western District of Washington
The scope of its decisions is daunting. Each year The Ninth Circuit decides roughly 12,000 cases with over 56,000 decided by district courts.
It will be a great honor to address this Circuit on the subject of free speech.
19 thoughts on “Turley To Address The Ninth Circuit Conference”
Mr. Turley, I have no idea if you read these comments, but I know there are a wide variety of people who do read your posts, left, right & center & I can say that there are a wide variety of people who have respect for your opinion. What that tells me is that it does not matter what side of the isle any of us sit on, many of us are getting tired of the lawlessness & blind justice for one set of standards verses another. Sure its great when it benefits you, but if you are to be objective you know that one day it will come around and hurt you. So in reality it NEVER benefits you. Our constitution was set & our branches of government were supposed to balance out power so this never happened. Yet of course power hungry individuals would find a way around this. I don’t understand how “Conservative” judges are seen as bad because they follow what is our constitution, it is not a living breathing document. Yet “Liberal” judges see it as such. Yet they all take the same oath – to uphold the constitution. Well what Constitution are we talking about? In America we have but ONE, so there should be ZERO arguments about that.
There are many people I do not agree with, however I respect our constitution & our freedoms that I would 100% NO DOUBT defend their freedoms, yet they would do everything in their power to take mine away. The way I see it is if I do not defend the freedoms we have today, who will be there to defend mine? Well I am learning not a lot of people. But I can tell you this much if the tables turn, I will still defend those same people’s freedoms. because I cannot ever, nor do I want to ever imagine living in a place where we are not able to speak our minds freely! Maybe that is what some people want, until the tables are turned on them.
I am unfortunate enough to live under the 9th circuit, and I do not agree with their rulings hardly ever. I do hope they listen to your advice on freedom of speech. I do have respect for the law & justice – when it works like its supposed to. But I have seen so much corruption & legislative activism from the bench that it truly scares me & it makes me wonder if this branch is able to be free to hold our others branches accountable? They need to put their personal opinions aside & start acting like judges & start defending our constitution.
Thank you, I truly hope they listened to what you had to say.
Calling this court activist is being kind.
I need if is a way somebody to call me Esau Rivera I present live state California .I’m having some internal matters with the state Federal I was summit to a program that I shouldn’t be.an been harassed every night that I have to be in to complaints with use drugs .I present a desible retired an I been questions that they believe I’m a secret investigate all my family has been harassed..I present legal resident from el Salvador an i been question private from war back on 80s please contact me 5623146645
The 9th Circus should have been impeached en masses long ago for abuse of power, usurpation, corruption, dereliction et al.
“Desperate times call for desperate measures.”
– Obert Skye,
The ABA published an 80% reversal rate for the 9th Circus.
The 9th Circus persistently executes unconstitutional political and ideological acts rather than objective jurisprudential adjudication.
The judicial branch and the 9th Circus have no authority to legislate or execute.
“Legislating from the bench” and “executing from the bench” are subversion of the Constitution and capital treason against the nation.
“…courts…must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”
“[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
– Alexander Hamilton
i would like you to scold them for letting lawyer free speech get trampled under RPC 8.4, just a request. thanks Prof
Is it possible to stream the speech? I know the Prof will be excellent.
The free speech topic is a good choice for the 9th Circuit. Some key defender institutions have retreated, notably ACLU and University of California Berkeley. I’d come at the topic from the standpoint of this goal: long-term resilience of a meritocratic U.S. national dialog that can effectively solve gnarly, complex problems in real-time, while competing favorably with authoritarian government approaches (China, Russia) who can make decisions fast and impose controls over the range of opinion allowed to be expressed in order to shape opinion.
The free speech topic is sterile without a candid assessment of the 21st century infowarfare toolkit. Those intent on shaping opinion by means of outright deception, conspiratorial thinking, ad hominem character assassinations, and anonymous or impostered authorship, now have unprecedented access to global media channels. Social media, web sites, blogs, You Tube channels, etc, present new avenues to completely circumvent traditional media gatekeepers such as editors, TV news producers, fact-checkers and publishers. As has been revealed in the wake of the 2016 Presidential election, foreign intelligence operatives tasked by their government orchestrated a sophisticated, sustained campaign of “active measures” to shape opinion in the US in the direction of distrust, alienation, hatred — Russia used our new free speech technologies to undermine our unity and polity. They attacked our democracy by weaponizing our freedoms.
If there is consensus in acknowledging our vulnerability to foreign infowarfare attacks, what about domestic actors and institutions who are similarly using infowarfare — deceptive, manipulative opinion-shaping techniques — to advance their own agendas? Where does healthy pluralism break down into divisive, unproductive anarchy? Where is the line to be drawn that prevents freedom of speech from descending into a cacaphony of misinformation, robbing the polity of a unified, shared model of reality? Traditionally, media gatekeepers and journalistic standards stood sentry to impose discipline over the reportage and opinions given access to mass public consumption. The free speech challenge of this century is not only that gatekeeping has been obsoleted by technology, but also that authoritarian nation states have decided to wage war on democracy and freedom by infowarfare subversion.
Therefore, it survival of our free society is the paramount concern, which it must be, then reasonable countermeasures to blunt infowarfare and its goal, increasing mind-control to undermine and restructure loyalties, must be at the center of the discussion. And, the discussion must include the question, can aggressive truth-warfare prevail over infowarfare campaigns based in fictional narratives? How is truth discipline to be maintained among the good guys? This translates into how standards of objectivity and truth-seeking/reportage are to be rigorously defended and strengthened? Whose responsibility will this be? Where will the authority come from to discipline outliers?
Only after having laid out the problem in its full context can there be a productive discussion of how the Federal Courts’ role in defending our freedom might unfold.
would you object to a meeting in Alaska?
In CONUS; COntiguous United States only includes the lower 48.
9th needs breaking up
I consider “The west” to be west of Kansas City, not just west of the Mississippi. There is no real free speech in California. Girl let me warn you. When it rains, then it pours.
Lobery2nd —- Your knowledge of geography is deficient; Kansas City is on the Missouri River which is to the west of the Mississippi River.
Public school really going to the dogs these days…
Eau Contraire! I would say reading comprehension skills are going to the dogs. . .
I wish you the best of luck. The word Boondoggle comes to mind. Or this:
The current occupant has certainly made 43 look almost scholarly by comparison. And we thought GW was only a malleable puppet; if we only knew….
That clip always cracks me up; 43 demonstrated some remarkably good moves, to boot.
Is the ninth circuit the court who overrides the president each time? They appear to be activists not judges. I work w judges, No judge should make a ruling with personal passions and opinions in mind. If it is the same circuit I’m thinking of kindly remind them to keep personal liberal bias’s out of it.
Keep personal liberal bias’s out? Personal passions and opinions? A judge should follow law right? So is it OK for a judge to show his or her personal conservative bias? There are blindfolds on the statues of lady justice.
At least they decided to meet in the continental US this time. They have chosen Hawaii before. 😉 Have a great speech.
So Paul, would you object to a meeting in Alaska?
Comments are closed.