It’s your right to protest, to bring your grievances to the attention of others, the world. That the world might not care about your grievances, or at least not care as much as, or in the way that, you might be a good line beyond which you shouldn’t go. But that’s such an old school notion, quaint and archaic.

You see, if you believe it’s important, it is important. If others fail to grasp its importance (fools), then they must be made to understand that it is the most important thing ever and must become the center of their universe because, you, a smart and passionate person, believe it to be so. After all, your opinion is entitled to respect. Everybody says so. And if people won’t respect your opinion, they must be forced to do so. And by respect, they mean you make it the center of your universe just as they have. Anything less would be heresy, and you know what happens to heresy. Continue reading →

In light of the Bruen decision, the attorney general of Massachusetts has provided guidance on the issuance of concealed carry permits.

• It remains unlawful to carry a firearm in Massachusetts without a license….
• Licensing authorities should continue to enforce the “prohibited person” and
  “suitability” provisions of the license-to-carry statute….

The guidance goes on to create the appearance of compliance while suggesting that little more has changed than creating the appearance. Suitability? Nothing subjective there, right? Continue reading →

America is a great nation, and Americans are a great people. Not perfect, but great. If you can’t see this, but can only see failure, misery and horror in this nation, then the problem isn’t this nation but you.

Never lose hope. Never give up. And reject those who believe there is no hope, everything is horrible and we are a failed nation. Believe in our values, our freedom, and to the extent we have not yet achieved them, work to make this nation ever better.

I’m proud to be an American and I love this country. Happy 4th of July.

Remember women? Of course you do, even if you’re afraid to say so lest your woke friends shun you as if you’ve just announced that you hate kale. At the New York Times, Pamela Paul makes a point that I’ve raised in various contexts between the right and left,and why the former is obvious while the latter is insidious.

Because the far right and the far left have found the one thing they can agree on: Women don’t count.

The right’s position here is the better known, the movement having aggressively dedicated itself to stripping women of fundamental rights for decades. Thanks in part to two Supreme Court justices who have been credibly accused of abusive behavior toward women, Roe v. Wade, nearly 50 years a target, has been ruthlessly overturned.

Continue reading →

In light of the crushing, if entirely expected, blow of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Bruen, the New York legislature did what it does best, rushed to pass a law. So it did, and the default governor signed it, proclaiming how she’s on the side of freedom and liberty by making the exercise of constitutional rights as difficult as possible.

The state’s new gun law bars the carrying of handguns in many public settings such as subways and buses, parks, hospitals, stadiums and day cares. Guns will be off-limits on private property unless the property owner indicates that he or she expressly allows them. At the last minute, lawmakers added Times Square to the list of restricted sites.

Continue reading →

Ed. Note: Chris Halkides has been kind enough to try to make us lawyers smarter by dumbing down science enough that we have a small chance of understanding how it’s being used to wrongfully convict and, in some cases, execute defendants. Chris graduated from the University of Wisconsin-Madison with a Ph.D. in biochemistry, and teaches biochemistry, organic chemistry, and forensic chemistry at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington.

From the perspective of the defense, excluding the defendant does not require that the person who made the fingermark (an unintentionally made impression) be identified.  However, when they point to an alternate suspect, they gain value as evidence.  The location or medium in which fingermarks are made occasionally give probative value, for example when a medium such as blood localizes the time period in which the fingermark was made.  There are over 160 million fingerprints (deliberately made impressions) in the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS).  Therefore, an automated searching system, followed by manual checking, is used to identify the source of fingermarks. Continue reading →

The video is hard to watch, the clear and graphic view of 36-year-old Randy Cox sitting in the back of a police wagon, his hands cuffed behind him, then suddenly being hurled into the door head first and, well, you’ll see.

https://twitter.com/AttorneyCrump/status/1541572334569394176?s=20&t=w7ERjHLmfSQT-SsqMO26cQ

Continue reading →

While most people were losing their heads over the “big” Supreme Court decisions about guns, abortion and prayer, there was another ruling, unanimous, that would have (or at least, should have) been huge in less controversial times to criminal defense lawyers. In Ruan v. United States, the Supreme Court reversed the convictions of two medical doctors, for running what the government contended were “pill mills.”

Petitioners Xiulu Ruan and Shakeel Kahn are both doctors who actively practiced medicine. They both possessed licenses permitting them to prescribe controlled substances. The Government separately charged them with unlawfully dispensing and distributing drugs in violation of §841. Each proceeded to a jury trial, and each was convicted of the charges.
Continue reading →

The past week has been pretty hard at the Supreme Court for some, and pretty great for others. If you’ve been on the winning side, whether on guns, abortion, prayer or all three, you may take the attitude, “We won, you lost, get over it.” And, perhaps, you would also argue that if the other side was able to stack the deck with its ideological loyalists, they would have done so in a flash and been just as pleased with being winners.

But what about the legitimacy of the Supreme Court?

“Legitimacy is for losers,” a political scientist once said. It’s a profound concept. The winning side in a decision will gladly accept it without asking why. But the losing side — whether the decision is made by a basketball referee or the Supreme Court — will accept defeat only if they believe the decision was made fairly and by the book. Continue reading →

The Foundation for Individual Rights and Express, FIRE, which has picked up the gauntlet tossed in the trash by the ACLU on such civil liberties issues as free speech for people who don’t pray at the alter of identity politics (or donate to the ACLU), has taken up arms against the Biden administration’s proposed changes to Title IX regs for campus sex tribunals.

• eliminating students’ right to a live hearing;
• eliminating the right to cross-examination;
• weakening students’ right to active legal representation;
• allowing a single campus bureaucrat to serve as judge and jury;
• rejecting the Supreme Court’s definition of sexual harassment in favor of a definition that threatens free speech rights;
• requiring colleges and universities to use the weak “preponderance of the evidence” standard to determine guilt, unless they use a higher standard for other alleged misconduct.

Continue reading →