In that peculiar way that only comes about when someone argues vehemently against the very point they otherwise claim to believe, the mantra “but it’s not a criminal trial” was born during the tumultuous Senate confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh, reflecting one of the worst displays of politicizing confirmation for the Supreme Court possible.

In that case, the absence of any meaningful process in Kav’s “trial” for crimes committed against Christine Blasey Ford decades earlier was rationalized away as a “job interview.” It was far from an analogy, but it wasn’t entirely off base. It served to rationalize a misbegotten grasp of what was being done by those who, under most other circumstances, would bemoan the deprivation of due process.

Since they hated Kavenaugh, they needed some means to overcome their hypocrisy, and latched onto the “but it’s not a criminal trial” excuse. Anything to beat the unpleasantness of cognitive dissonance, or compel an unwilling but passionate individual to suffer the burden of thinking. Continue reading →

Every Thanksgiving, someone writes a post about how to argue with your crazy uncle. Sometimes the uncle is characterized as angry, or deplorable, or some other unpleasant word, but there are two components that never change. It’s always an “uncle,” because not even the woke want to argue with daddy, who pays for their iPhone and Cheetos, and it’s always the brilliant, reasonable and completely righteous youngster informing their idiot elder of how he’s destroying the universe.

While this is a daily occurrence for many of us, as I am deluged with law students and baby lawyers informing me how wrong I am about everything because they’re all the best and brightest Lake Wobegon has to offer, it takes on a special meaning for Thanksgiving, when young people are compelled by the evil forces of family to spend time with relatives they despise. They may attack an Old like me out of choice, but they are forced to sit next to their uncle who doesn’t even use Axe Body Wash or manscape. Continue reading →

It’s bad enough, both for substantive as well as factual reasons, that the Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe held that sex offender registration was not punitive, but civil, and therefore beyond the reach of the Ex Post Facto Clause. Not only was it grounded in utterly baseless statistics of recidivism, but it indulged in the fantasy that rhetoric was an adequate substitute for inquiry before destroying the future of an entire class of people.

In other words, this categorical group known as “sex offenders” was so deserving of a life of misery, prohibition and shunning for the putative safety of the community that there was a rational basis for civil rules to make them societal outcasts. Where they can live, work, exist for decades, if not the rest of their lives, was constrained to the point of impossibility. And should they mess up compliance with any detail, back they go to prison.

But it’s not criminal. It’s civil. For no better reason than legislatures say it’s not punitive, but for the safety of the children, Even though it’s punitive. Extremely punitive. Continue reading →

How many times have lawyers tried to tell the passionate believers in videotaping the cops that there are still laws that apply, even to them? This video, taken at the Babylon, New York Long Island Rail Road station, is a fascinating example of a fellow who believed a little too much in his invulnerability and the righteousness of his cause.

Smoking is prohibited on LIRR platforms. The guy taking the video was smoking a cigarette. Had he not been, he would have been fine taking video, but he was. And that means he’s subject to a summons, which means the cop is authorized to demand identification so he can write the ticket. Continue reading →

Aisha Fraser Mason was stabbed to death in her home in Shaker Heights. Who could have seen this coming? Well, anyone who cared to look.

Mason in August 2014 punched his then-wife 20 times and slammed her head against the dashboard of his car five times, breaking her orbital bone.

The couple’s children were in the back of the car when the attack occurred.

At the time, Lance Mason was called “judge.” Before that, he served in the state legislature. After his release from prison, serving nine months of a two year sentence, he was hired by Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson as a minority business development director. Not only did he hold positions of trust and power before and after, but he held them despite the harm he inflicted on his wife and children and the indicia of other “issues” that arose following his arrest for the brutal beating. Continue reading →

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced that he’s giving an additional $1.8 billion to Johns Hopkins University. This comes on top of $1.5 billion that he’s given over the years. And it’s great. Great that he can do so. Great that he chooses to do so, as this is his money and this is his choice of what to do with it.

But as much as he deserves the kudos he seeks by making a big splash of his generosity, does his rationale bear up to scrutiny?

Here’s a simple idea I bet most Americans agree with: No qualified high school student should ever be barred entrance to a college based on his or her family’s bank account. Yet it happens all the time. Continue reading →

Among the more controversial aspects of the proposed Title IX sex adjudication regulations is that colleges, though not required to provide an appeal process, must make appeals available to both accuser and accused should they decide to offer it at all.

We propose adding section 106.45(b)(5) stating that a recipient (college) may choose to offer an appeal. If a recipient offers an appeal, it must allow both parties to appeal. In cases where there has been a finding of responsibility, although a complainant may appeal on the ground that the remedies are not designed to restore or preserve the complainant’s access to the recipient’s education program or activity, a complainant is not entitled to a particular sanction against the respondent.

This implicates the concept of “double jeopardy,” that a finding in favor of the accused at the hearing doesn’t conclude the matter, but that the accuser gets a second bite at the apple of guilt. Note the word “concept,” as the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy doesn’t apply. It’s a limitation on criminal prosecution and this is an administrative proceeding, even if it’s quasi-criminal in nature and constructed to circumvent constitutional mandates. Continue reading →

From Cristopher “CJ” Precopia’s point of view, his arrest happened on the “good guy curve,” without any clue why cops were there, why they wanted him.

The 21-year-old Williamson County, TX, man told KVUE News he was confusedwhen he was arrested on September 22, 2017 at the lumber yard where he worked. He couldn’t remember when he last spoke to the woman, whom he had dated years earlier in high school.

I had no idea why everything was happening, and I was lost,

The police, of course, knew better, as they always do, even when they’re completely wrong. Obviously, the perp knew why they were there, because they wouldn’t be there if he didn’t know. This was especially true for Precopia, after what he did. Continue reading →

It’s dead. This won’t come as anything new to regular readers here, as I’ve been chronicling this for quite a while now, even noting that it admits it’s no longer the organization it was decades ago, and it no longer wants to be. But it’s dead. The ACLU is dead, and it announced its demise on twitter.

It promotes an unfair process, inappropriately favoring the accused and letting schools ignore their responsibility under Title IX to respond promptly and fairly to complaints of sexual violence.

— ACLU (@ACLU) November 16, 2018

In four words, this twit said it all: “inappropriately favoring the accused.” Even when it confessed that it would no longer concern itself with civil liberties of disfavored people, bringing a tear to former Executive Director Ira Glasser’s face, and much to the chagrin of the old civil rights lawyers who hadn’t yet sold their souls to social justice or the lavish wealth that came from hating the right people, there was still some tiny twinkle of hope that the ACLU would refocus, remember why it was formed, why it existed, and choose to stand up for the Constitution.  Continue reading →

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”

–Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge. Dodgson), Through the Looking-Glass, chapter 6, p. 205 (1934). First published in 1872.

Definitions of words have suffered gravely over the past few years. Vague words, like harassment, have come to mean anything the person claiming victimhood decides they mean. Even words with reasonably well-defined legal meaning, such as rape, have become untethered from their definition. When words mean anything, they mean nothing. Continue reading →