In 2005, Congress enacted the Protection of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act, and stated in clear words why.

The purposes of this chapter are as follows:

(1) To prohibit causes of action against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or ammunition products, and their trade associations, for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products or ammunition products by others when the product functioned as designed and intended.

(2) To preserve a citizen’s access to a supply of firearms and ammunition for all lawful purposes, including hunting, self-defense, collecting, and competitive or recreational shooting. Continue reading →

I can’t quite remember where or when I heard Morris Dees speak back in the 90’s, but I remember that he was one of the very few speakers who ever inspired me. I may not be easily moved by speeches, but then, I may be as easily fooled as a great many other people. Morris Dees was fired by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit he co-founded in 1971 with Julian Bond and Joe Levin.

Fired.

Morris Dees, now 82, was the SPLC. What could this now-old man have done to be unceremoniously ousted from the organization he co-founded?

The group’s president, Richard Cohen, did not give a specific reason for the dismissal of Mr. Dees, 82, on Wednesday. But Mr. Cohen said in a statement that as a civil-rights group, the S.P.L.C. was “committed to ensuring that the conduct of our staff reflects the mission of the organization and the values we hope to instill in the world.” Continue reading →

Within minutes of D.C. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson imposing a second sentence on Paul Manafort, New York County District Attorney Cy Vance sprung his news.

“No one is beyond the law in New York,” said District Attorney Vance. “Following an investigation commenced by our Office in March 2017, a Manhattan grand jury has charged Mr. Manafort with state criminal violations which strike at the heart of New York’s sovereign interests, including the integrity of our residential mortgage market. I thank our prosecutors for their meticulous investigation, which has yielded serious criminal charges for which the defendant has not been held accountable.”

Manafort, according to the indictment, lied on his residential mortgage application, making him as heinous a criminal as a few million other New Yorkers and other Americans, particularly during the frenzy leading to the bubble bursting in 2007. Somehow, New York’s sovereign interests survived, hyperbole notwithstanding. Continue reading →

[Ed. Note: This is a guest post by my brilliant Fault Lines colleague, Sam Bieler.]

New York’s legislators are about to make a terrible mistake. They are going to repeal New York’s double jeopardy protections to stick it to Donald Trump. Maybe they will succeed. The price of their success will be imperiling every other criminal defendant in New York long after Trump is gone.

Led by newly-elected Attorney General Letitia James, New York legislators are returning to a scheme the previous AG spearheaded in April 2018, to modify New York’s double jeopardy law. That law, CPL § 40.20, states:

A person may not be twice prosecuted for the same offense.

Continue reading →

That Aunt Becky was named in the complaint made it a lock that it would be front page news, but charges against 33 “affluent parents,” not to mention college coaches and others, put the lie to the cries that the only unfairness in college admissions was the dark hole of diversity. It’s a cesspool all around.

When it was time for my son to go to college, I did everything possible to “game” his admission, from prep courses to training with the best fencing coaches to enhance his interests as an athletic recruit. What I did not do is what Willke Farr co-chair Gordon Caplan is alleged to have done, buy my kid’s admission.

I didn’t even know such a thing was possible, but to be honest, if I was ever inclined to bribe someone, it would be for the benefit my kids. Continue reading →

For obvious reasons, there’s a great deal of attention paid to police officers and federal agents who break the law or deprive people of their constitutional rights. But there’s a similar cadre of people, some in uniforms and some not, some with weapons and some not, who evade much scrutiny, though their performance of their job can have as brutal an impact on people’s lives.

From 2009 to 2012 the U.S. Department of Justice charged 254 police officers throughout the United States with violating the individual rights of Americans.

The private security industry remains historically insulated from claims of civil rights-related violations and the resulting criminal sanctions that can be imposed against security personnel. The private security industry in the United States is much larger than the public sector police force; the industry outnumbers public police by a ratio of at least three to one. This growing number of security personnel could lead to increased civil rights violations.

Continue reading →

As a young lad in the well of courtrooms in Manhattan, I came to appreciate how Legal Aid lawyers were the tough, hardened warriors of criminal defense. On the whole, they were a mighty group. Sure, there were lousy lawyers, lazy lawyers in the bunch, and defendants ridiculed their “lemon aids” as being barely lawyers, if lawyers at all. But we knew better. These were killers, unafraid of any prosecutor, any judge, any case.

That Legal Aid Society no longer exists, having been taken over by the toadies to social justice.

A couple of years ago we published “Are you a cissy?” , a spoof of a compulsory training inflicted on us by the boss’s wife who announced a mandatory policy of quizzing our clients about gender issues. On first contact, no less.

No doubt it’s impolitic to make fun of silly decrees when they emanate from the boss’s wife. So we weren’t too surprised that the boss got mad as a wet hen when she saw our blog on the Company email.

Continue reading →

There’s a professor at Sarah Lawrence, the extremely effete, extremely expensive, extremely progressive, northeast liberal arts college, who, according to students there who have joined together to call themselves the Diaspora Coalition, “attacks black and brown bodies.”

They will not stand for it.

“When black and brown bodies are under attack, what do we do? Stand up, fight back!” Approaching 6th hour of sit-in with over 120 students occupying Westlands. pic.twitter.com/JkTOW58Afl

— The Phoenix (@SLCPhoenix) March 11, 2019

The professor is named Samuel Abrams. He teaches politics. His weapon is ideas, put into words. His words were like knives cutting out their hearts, their souls, their right to never be required to let unorthodox ideas make them confront the possibility that they weren’t entitled. Continue reading →

In one of those classic “fortuitous” moments that happen at the South by Southwest Festival, which used to be a great opportunity to try ‘shrooms and has since morphed into a great opportunity to be totally progressive or suffer a different type of stoned, Bill Nye the Science Guy asked the last question of the adored Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez.

Slate, which is chronicling AOC’s rise to power for the newer testament, provides the transcript. Continue reading →

For as long as I’ve practiced law, non-lawyers have argued that the Constitution ought to mean what it says. To lawyers, this evokes the normal round of head-shaking, since “what it says” is the perennial question, and what that means tends to be whatever the person reading it wants it to mean. Words are not precise instruments, no matter how plain they may seem to you.

At ArcDigital (where I also post on occasion), Illinois political science prof Nicholas Grossman argues that we have a derelict Congress for its failure to impeach Trump. Not because of collusion with Russia, or being incapable of telling the truth, but because he has engaged in rampant bribery before our eyes. If we loved the Constitution, then we should demand it be faithfully applied here. Now.

America’s Founders worried a great deal about corruption. They worried so much about a president acting for personal financial gain, rather than exclusively for the interests of the United States, that they forbid it in the Constitution three times.

Continue reading →