Hot Potato

26 05 2015

New Orleans

Appeals-5 upholds Hanen.

Next stop:  SCOTUS.  Either way, they’ll either implicitly uphold Appeals-5 by refusing to grant cert or hear the case themselves.

When you wipe this case down to the bare metal of the hard drive, (though I have to quit saying that, because more and more hard drives today are SSD and M.2), it’s all a matter of the work permits, whether Obama blew threw the letter and spirit of 1986 IRCA (*) to grant so many work permits to so many people in one fell swoop.  Forbearing deportation is as easy as the President refusing to file civil deportation lawsuits, so whatever the Federal judiciary ultimately does will not affect that.  I’m cynical enough to think that even if SCOTUS finds that the executive branch can’t grant work permits in this fashion, I still think Obama can find an end run around that — Simply refuse to prosecute employers for knowingly hiring illegal aliens.

The one dissenting judge who found for Obama said that these kinds of matters should be handled legislatively.  Ironically, the reason Boehner and McConnell backed off of their (probably fan dance) effort to defund DAPA as part of the HLS funding bill was because they said that the judiciary should deal with this matter.  It’s as if we’re seeing a game of hot potato being played in front of our eyes.

(*) – 1986 IRCA does allow the President to grant work permits unilaterally to those aliens who have otherwise not gotten them.  However, until Obama, that authority was only ever used for special circumstances relating to individuals who got them.  That’s part of the dispute in TX v USA, whether the letter or spirit of that provision of IRCA is contrary to Obama’s mass work permit giveaway.

Sweeps Month

1 05 2015



Actually, it’s sweeps month clickbait, click as in both the remote control and the mouse.

I talked about this case back in February.

And as far as this issue, we all know that SCOMO will eventually decide that Amendment 5 doesn’t apply to felon in possession.  And that will be that for that.

NR, You’re Starting Something You Don’t Know How to Finish

29 04 2015

Washington, D.C.


The Constitution Is Silent on Same-Sex Marriage

If the Supreme Court rules that all state governments must recognize same-sex unions as marriages, it will not just be saying that the view that marriage should be defined in law as the union of a man and a woman is wrong—and saying that without any clear constitutional warrant. It will be officially declaring that this view is irrational, in opposition to the country’s fundamental principles, and, quite possibly, bigoted. The Court should refrain from taking that reckless step.

An older view of marriage has steadily been losing ground to a newer one, and that process began long before the debate over same-sex couples. On the older understanding, society and, to a lesser extent, the government needed to shape sexual behavior—specifically, the type of sexual behavior that often gives rise to children—to promote the well-being of those children. On the newer understanding, marriage is primarily an emotional union of adults with an incidental connection to procreation and children.

What NR is trying to say here is that marriage is and should be a societal institution whose rules and precepts and bounds are done with the good of society and its posterity in mind, rather than just an agreement between two (or more, eventually) or more people who are acting out some temporal amorous and carnal pleasure.

Can you really handle the implications of what you’re starting, NR?  I don’t think you can.

Never send a boy to do a man’s job.  Likewise, never send NR to do a NRx’s job.

That’s Just About Right

24 04 2015

Washington, D.C.


Attorney: ‘Same-Sex Couples Have a Perfect Right to Reproduce’

The attorney who argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003 in favor of striking down the sodomy law in the state of Texas said on Friday that homosexuals have “a perfect right to reproduce.”

“Same-sex couples have a perfect right to reproduce – whether they’re married or not – and are, in fact, doing that,” Paul Smith, attorney and partner at Jenner & Block, said at an American Constitution Society (ACS) event to discuss the high court’s hearing oral arguments on Tuesday on same-sex marriage in the Obergefell v. Hodges case.

Something that is biologically impossible is now a “right.”  Soon, saying in public that gay couples can’t reproduce by the laws of biology will be an *-ism or a *-phobia.  Because science.


Okay, the smart alecks who aren’t quite as clever as they think they are, are already yapping “sperm donor” and “surrogate mother.”  True, but that only means that one half of the “same sex couple” in question is reproducing.

Twenty Second

22 04 2015



Police and prosecutors frustrated over felons committing crimes with guns

Law enforcement officials on two fronts are upset concerning the way judges deal with felons who have violated gun laws.  Police Chief Sam Dotson and the circuit attorney’s office believe a recent case that involved 22-year-old Bruce Edward Johnson is an example of what upsets them.

Johnson was arrested as a result of the rolling gun battle on interstate 44 and Interstate 55 Monday.  He’s no stranger to police or the court system. In 2011 he was charged with unlawful use of a weapon, he got probation. In 2014 he violated that probation this time he got 120 days shock time. And, now he’s been arrested again for unlawful use of a weapon felony possession. St. Louis City Police Chief Sam Dotson said, “When somebody pleads guilty to felony, and both of those charges were felonies, we have to do better than just probation and then when they violate probation we’ll give you probation again and let you try it again. And now, look what happens, put dozens of lives at risk.”  Mary Pat Carl, an assistant circuit attorney said, “We’re absolutely concerned about these things we can’t have people who use firearms who possess firearms can’t get first second third chances.”

Well, it’s the 22nd Circuit, full of black and white liberal judges, so its motto is:  “Everyone deserves a 22nd chance.”

Prosecutors are also concerned about the recently passed Amendment 5, they say it benefits felons but does nothing to help people who can already legally carry guns.  They tell me some judges have decided the amendment means no longer can courts prosecute convicted felons for possessing legal firearms.

Even if it means the state can’t, the Feds still can.  Where’s Richard Callahan’s office?

The Other Aisle

7 04 2015

Washington, D.C.

As useless as the Republicans are, you have to remember that that other party is just about 100% thrown in to open borders no borders immigration surge.

Every Senate Democrat voted for Gang Bangers of Eight in 2013.  Every Senate Democrat in this current Congress helped prevent the passage of a DHS funding bill that defunded Obama’s amnesty fatwa.  Every House Democrat voted against that same bill.  Of the purported Democrat Presidential candidates, the only one that has a thawed relationship with immigration patriotism is Jim Webb.

And now, all but seven House Democrats have signed on as amici curiae on Obama’s side in Texas v USA.

Not Profound

26 03 2015

Washington, D.C.

Deals a blow?

Not really, not practically.

Hold my hand, and I’ll walk you through this.

All it means is that SCOTUS has found that minority-favorable gerrymanders are not an implicit requirement of the Voting Rights Act.

It does not mean that any such districts in existence now will be wiped out, and it does not mean that they will be specifically prohibited in the future.  All it means is that if they’re not drawn, it’s going to be all but impossible for the NAACP et al. to use the Federal judiciary as a weapon to force their existence.

However, they will continue to exist for at least a few more decennial redistricting cycles for two main reasons:

1.  Republican state legislators and black Democrat state legislators want them to exist.

2.  White Democrat state legislators, while they know now that their existence marginally hurts white Democrats, aren’t going to be in a much of a mood to work against their existence, because they’re too scared to tell blacks no.

For my new best friend, in case you’ve bought into the leftist crackpot hysteria about gerrymandering, then I’ll point you back to what I wrote in this space last November.  I’ll make it so easy for you that I’ll blockquote my favorite source, myself, instead of forcing you to click on a link:

NOTE:  The following section was updated on December 17 in accordance with the final Congressional runoffs and recounts complete.

Are you ready to put the leftist hoopla over gerrymandering to bed?  Hold my hand and come with me.

In 2010, the national popular vote for Congressional candidates was 52.2% R 44.6% D.  In 2014, 52.6% R 44.4% D.  Notice how almost the same these results are.

Remember, the 2010 votes were fed into the Congressional maps drawn in 2001 and extant from 2001-2011.  This year’s vote is fed into these great evil Republican gerrymandered maps that are and will be extant from 2011-2021.

So you feed just about the same two party percentage split into two different Congressional district maps, and what do you get?  242 seats in 2010, 247 seats in 2014.  So this great Republican gerrymandered map only results in five more Republican seats using virtually the same popular vote percentages.

Then again, you already put the gerrymandering mania to bed, because you read this space.  Earlier this year, the NYT did a story about a study that several university professors did.  They fed the 2012 Congressional vote, which in raw terms was slightly more Democrat than Republican, into thousands of hypothetical national Congressional districting maps, ranging from the craziest pro-Democrat to the craziest pro-Republican and everything in between.  The researchers found that only a few of the craziest pro-Democrat maps would have resulted in an actual Democrat House majority; all the other maps, meaning most Democrat-favorable maps and all the neutral maps and pro-Republican maps, resulted in a Republican majority.  It also found that the real world map drawn in 2011 is, on the researchers’ relative scale, a moderately pro-Republican map, and not a crazy one.  Which makes sense, because not every state legislature in 2011 was Republican-run, and some Democrat-ones (think:  California and Illinois) did favorable Democrat gerrymanders in those states.  The researchers’ conclusion was that the main problem Democrats have in Congressional elections isn’t gerrymandering, (and they reminded us that gerrymandering’s original purpose was to draw short bus districts for blacks, the Republican benefit fell out of the design accidentally), but the fact that Democrat voters are clumped up in small geographical areas, i.e. big cities.

The moral of this story:  Five seats.  Wow.  Some conspiracy.





Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,235 other followers