Category: Constitutional Law

The Unholy Marriage Between the CIA and NYPD

Respectfully submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger

If you think the Government is allowed to spy on Americans too much already, this next story will increase your blood pressure.  It was recently disclosed by the Associated Press that a CIA undercover operative has been directly advising the New York Police Department for at least 3 months.  I could have sworn that it was illegal for the CIA to spy on Americans, but nothing has been done to curb this possible violation and abuse of American’s privacy. Continue reading “The Unholy Marriage Between the CIA and NYPD”

Parents Demand California School Board Member Resign After Disclosure of “Confidential Marriage” To Murderer

The Fontana Unified School District board is not generally a hot bed of controversy, but it is the focus of a novel controversy after member Leticia Garcia revealed that she has a “confidential marriage” to a convicted murderer who was recently released. The existence of such confidential marriages is a surprise to most citizens, but not as much as the existence of a former convict husband for a recently elected board member who reportedly had said she was divorced.
Continue reading “Parents Demand California School Board Member Resign After Disclosure of “Confidential Marriage” To Murderer”

Federal Judge Dismisses War Powers Challenge By Members of Congress

Soon after the news that Gadhafi had been shot, Judge Reggie Walton issued an opinion dismiss the lawsuit by members of Congress challenging the war powers claim underlying the intervention in the Libyan war without a declaration of Congress. I represent the members in that litigation. The Court declined to rule on the merits of the constitutional claims and instead held that the court does not have jurisdiction to rule on such questions. Despite the timing, the opinion did not turn on the removal of Gadhafi. The opinion is below.
Continue reading “Federal Judge Dismisses War Powers Challenge By Members of Congress”

The Truth Police: The Supreme Court Takes Up Stolen Valor

Below is today’s column in The Los Angeles Times on the Supreme Court granting certiorari in the Alvarez case and the constitutionality of the Stolen Valor Act. I have long been a critic of the Stolen Valor Act and supported the decision of the Ninth Circuit to strike down the law. Civil libertarians have good reason to worry.
Continue reading “The Truth Police: The Supreme Court Takes Up Stolen Valor”

Gingrich: You Cannot Trust Politicians Who Do Not Pray

Recently, I wrote a column in the Washington Post about the increasing use of faith as an issue in the 2012 presidential campaign. In the Western Republican Presidential Debate, the candidates appeared to double down on the use of politicized piety. Rick Santorum reaffirmed that a candidate’s faith was essential to his qualifications. Newt Gingrich, however, used the opportunity to again attack agnostics, atheists, and secularists – saying that you cannot trust any leader who does not pray.
Continue reading “Gingrich: You Cannot Trust Politicians Who Do Not Pray”

Pennsylvania Officer Threatens Ron Paul Supporter With Arrest for Filming Him in Public

We have yet another case of an officer threatening to arrest a citizen for filming him in public. In the perfect libertarian nightmare, the officer was threatening a Ron Paul supporter who he had accused of distracting traffic with his sign in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Continue reading “Pennsylvania Officer Threatens Ron Paul Supporter With Arrest for Filming Him in Public”

Arizona v. Gant (2009)

-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger

The Fourth Amendment often appears to be on life support, however in Arizona v. Gant, it got a slight reprieve. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 with Stevens, joined by Scalia, Souter, Thomas, and Ginsburg voting in the majority. Not the usual grouping for a 5-4 decision. This case involves the search-incident-to-arrest exception to the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches.

Continue reading Arizona v. Gant (2009)”

Jewish Women: Step Aside For Men

-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger

In the Hasidic neighborhood of South Williamsburg in Brooklyn, New York, persons unknown has been putting up signs in Yiddish that translate to: “Precious Jewish daughter, please move to the side when a man approaches.” City workers have removed the signs, not based on the message but because it’s illegal to affix signs on street trees.

Continue reading “Jewish Women: Step Aside For Men”

The Politics of Pain: Florida Legislator Seeks To Bring Back Electric Chairs and Firing Squads For Executions

Rep. Brad Drake (R., Eucheeanna) wants to put the pain back into executions. The Florida Republican has filed a bill to require the use of electrocution or firing squads to execute people — saying that lethal injection is simply too easy a way out for convicted murderers.
Continue reading “The Politics of Pain: Florida Legislator Seeks To Bring Back Electric Chairs and Firing Squads For Executions”

Boston Mayor: Civil Disobedience Will Not Be Tolerated

As complaints rise over mass arrests by Boston police in the Occupy Boston protests, Mayor Thomas Menino decided to add a rather draconian note by announcing ” “Civil disobedience will not be tolerated.” It was a moment reminiscent of former Chicago Mayor Richard Daley announcing in the 1968 Democratic Convention protests that “the policeman isn’t there to create disorder; the policeman is there to preserve disorder.”

Continue reading “Boston Mayor: Civil Disobedience Will Not Be Tolerated”

Toddler or Terrorist? Father Detained For Taking Picture of Daughter in Mall

Chris White, 45, has become the latest victim in a trend in the United States (here) and England cracking down on citizens taking pictures in public. In White’s case, he was simply taking pictures of his daughter at a shopping center in Glasgow, Scotland when he was detained as a possible terrorist threat.
Continue reading “Toddler or Terrorist? Father Detained For Taking Picture of Daughter in Mall”

Obama and Civil Liberties: Talk of the Nation

Today, I will appearing on the National Public Radio (NPR) program, Talk of the Nation to discussing my column in the Los Angeles Times on Barack Obama’s disastrous impact on civil liberties in the United States. The piece has generated some interesting discussion on the LA Times blog as well as other blogs. Despite my disagreement with some of the commenters, any discussion of civil liberties is welcomed in this political atmosphere. Ironically, the day of the column (which specifically discussed the President’s assertion of his right to kill citizens he considers terrorists), President Obama ordered the killing of U.S. cleric Anwar al-Aulaqi and reportedly a second U.S. born cleric. [Update: Here is the TOTN interview].

Continue reading “Obama and Civil Liberties: Talk of the Nation”

Iran Responds to Film on Repression of Artists By Ordering The Flogging and Jailing of Actress

The Iranian courts have responded to a film detailing the repression of artists in Iran by ordering the flogging and imprisonment of an actress, Marzieh Vafamehr. Vafamehr will be given 90 lashes and imprisoned for a year for her role in “My Tehran for Sale,” a film that tells the story of a young actress in Tehran who cannot perform due to government repression.

Continue reading “Iran Responds to Film on Repression of Artists By Ordering The Flogging and Jailing of Actress”

A Barney Fife Free Speech Moment

Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger

How many of you know the difference between a right and a privilege?  As most of the audience for Res Ipsa Loquitur have an interest in law and/or politics, I’m going to hazard the guess that most of you have at least a rudimentary understanding of the difference in terms although it is a deceptively complicated subject on a philosophical level.  However, just so there is no mistake in fundamental terms, we’ll start with basic relevant definitions.

rights, n.,

1) plural of right, which is the collection of entitlements which a person may have and which are protected by the government and the courts or under an agreement (contract).

privileges and immunities, n.,

the fundamental rights that people enjoy in free governments, protected by the U.S. Constitution in Article IV: “The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities in the several States,” and specifically to be protected against state action by the Constitution’s 14th Amendment (1868): “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” The definition of “privileges and immunities” was first spelled out by Supreme Court Justice Bushrod Washington in 1823: “protection by the government, with the right to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety, subject, nevertheless, to such restraints as the government may prescribe for the general good of the whole.” However, the exact nature of privileges and immunities which the state governments could limit has long been in dispute, with the U.S. Supreme Court gradually tipping toward protecting the individual rights of citizens against state statutes that might impinge on constitutional rights. [emphasis added]

Constitutional rights, n.,

rights given or reserved to the people by the U.S. Constitution, and in particular, the Bill of Rights (first ten amendments). These rights include: writ of habeas corpus, no bill of attainder, no duties or taxes on transporting goods from one state to another (Article I, Section 9); jury trials (Article III, Section 1); freedom of religion, speech, press (which includes all media), assembly and petition (First Amendment); state militia to bear arms (Second Amendment); no quartering of troops in homes (Third Amendment); no unreasonable search and seizure (Fourth Amendment); major (“capital and infamous”) crimes require indictment, no double jeopardy (more than one prosecution) for the same crime, no self-incrimination, right to due process, right to just compensation for property taken by eminent domain (Fifth Amendment); in criminal law, right to a speedy trial, to confront witnesses against one, and to counsel (Sixth Amendment); trial by jury (Seventh Amendment); right to bail, no excessive fines, and no cruel and unusual punishments (Eighth Amendment); unenumerated rights are reserved to the people (Ninth Amendment); equal protection of the laws (14th Amendment); no racial bars to voting (15th Amendment); no sex bar to voting (19th Amendment); and no poll tax (24th Amendment). Constitutional interpretation has expanded and added nuances to these rights. [emphasis added]

Now what would you say if you knew that state senators were proposing legislation that would convert Freedom of Speech from a right to a privilege?  This is not a theoretical question.  Four state senators from New York are currently considering proposing such legislation.  Fortunately, the 1st Amendment gives us the right to discuss what a bad and scary idea it is that they propose.

Continue reading “A Barney Fife Free Speech Moment”

Civil Rights Giant Dies

-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger

Rev. Fred L. Shuttlesworth is ranked alongside Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and the Rev. Ralph David Abernathy as one of the nation’s civil rights leaders. He was 89 when he died on Oct. 5 in Birmingham, Alabama. Shuttlesworth survived bombings, beatings, and the business end of a fire hose that left him chest injuries. Shuttlesworth was often on the front lines of civil rights protests.

Continue reading “Civil Rights Giant Dies”