“I think we need to go back to a time where you can trust an attorney is making an accurate and truthful representation to the court because if they don’t, then they won’t be able to practice law anymore,” Nessel said.
An advocate is responsible for pleadings and other documents prepared for litigation, but is usually not required to have personal knowledge of matters asserted therein, because litigation documents ordinarily present assertions by the client or by someone on the client's behalf and not assertions by the lawyer.
Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.3 Candor Toward the Tribunal
You'd think that a state AG would have at least some passing knowledge of their own state's rules of professional conduct for attorneys.
"with this letter you are on notice"
With this letter, I thee write! What an awful letter. Most of the jailhouse lawyers use this type of pseudolegalese. Hey! Do you suppose they have Michael Avenatti working for them?
The apportionment of representatives is just a small part of how the census figures are used. Some of the usages involving illegal aliens probably can't be cut even if congress were to make a law that was then signed by the president. The public education of minor illegal aliens is certainly one such area. That's why it's important as a matter of policy for the administration to be very precise about the particular instances in which the presence of illegal aliens will not be charged to the state harboring the illegal aliens. It comes down to whether the goal is to win at the scotus or to be an ideologue who always loses. I always liked to win the cases I took.
I do not believe that the courts are generally "screwed up". There are bad apples who use the law very much like a criminal uses a gun. These bad guys are disproportionately located in large cities. The pendulum has already started back to the conservative side. To me, the law feels very much the same today as it did in the 70s several years after the apex of the Warren Court.
Scotus said that there isn't any evidence that the government has done anything "wrong" yet. For scotus to take the case would have been improper under the ripeness doctrine. Most of my conservative colleagues agree that this was the only correct ruling that scotus could have made. The scotus doesn't usually spend much time opining on cases that it hasn't accepted for review. The fact that it did and what the court stated in dicta is likely being reviewed quite closely by conservative counsel working on these issues.
38 actually. Born in Donetsk, USSR. I believe that would make her a Ukrainian-American. :) Dyakuyu! I have a Ukrainian neighbor who's been teaching me a bit.
what do you mean that the standpoints are narrow? Do you mean that the differences between winning and losing on an issue are narrow? I don't quite understand what you are trying to say.
If you don't understand that law then it's easy to imagine that things just happen for no reason at all. A good analogy would be to the financial area. It may seem to a layperson that the type of reports that have to be generated and the types of investments that can be made on behalf of another person are some type of deep mystery that cannot possibly be understood. But, someone such as yourself and with a background in securities regulation, state investor blue sky laws, and the state's general rules of fiduciary relationship--why there's no mystery at all why certain forms need to be completed and reviewed and by whom.
I don't mean to sound dismissive. But, spending any time discussing indications of a clean victory is about as relevant as discussing which lawyers have better neckties. If conservatives actually want to win on this issue then the actual application of not counting illegal aliens present (under what specific circumstances are they not counted?) will need to be precisely delineated as to which govt programs,and which areas, ie. electoral representation, education, military, etc), Each noncounted area has got to pass rational basis. Because up to now illegal aliens have always been counted no matter for what purpose. Until about 30 years ago there weren't the large numbers of illegal immigrants that we have today. Much of the blame for the current state of affairs should be apportioned to Bill Clinton and IRAIRRA passed in 1999. But again, knowing who to blame for a problem isn't the same as actually solving the problem.
Professor Hawking doesn't look bad at all for being dead over 2 years.
Maybe it has something to do with black holes.
It seemed to me that scotus was possibly suggesting that if Trump could keep the reasons for kicking out the illegal aliens related to tax and revenue questions that it might likely pass Rational Basis scrutiny.
It would probably help you if you spend some time to familiarize yourself with the different levels of scrutiny applied to government actions by scotus (and the judiciary branch in general). "Rational basis" is one such test.
I've seen some constitutional law textbooks that are written for university-level courses. IMHO these are much better than any of the 1000+ page textbooks that the law students use. I was just snooping through a university book store a few years back and I couldn't keep myself from looking to see what books and courses were being used. But, I'm not sure that any of these are open now due to coronavirus lockdowns.
Hmmm. Sounds like a real political question concerning Pence's authority and powers. And of course, the scope of any possible powers and under what particular circumstances they might operate.
Does scotus have subject matter jurisdiction to take cases involving purely political questions? I'm asking for a deceased colleague who has recently voted for Joe Biden.
I'd enjoy following Canadian politics if the OPs would be so kind to include links every now and then to the latest political news. The same goes for politics from Mexico. Our own "press" doesn't even report on news that happened within the US. Sure, I could look it up myself But I might not find the best reports that accurately tell what has happened. Plus, I'm certain that the OPs always know more about the issues involved than I ever will. So links would helpful on your next update on Canadian politics. Thank you for taking the time to bring us this info!
Too much cake is also the main cause of sticking in the back end. Coincidence or not?
I'm absolutely positive that Santa ain't vegan. We always had lots of barbecue meats around every Christmas. I am not sure if our family purposely left barbecue out for Santa or if it was just around. My Dad really loved to smoke ribs and brisket. That's the one thing that I sure wish I had picked up from Dad when I had the chance.
Have you ever studied the law before? It doesn't have to be formal study. I'm just trying to understand at what level I should write. I was explaining how I approach analyzing a court decision. The reason I think it's important to do that here is because the justices have seeded (I believe) some clues in the per curium decision as to how the Trump administration might structure it's plans regarding how illegal aliens should be counted.
Sometimes my longer comments seem to hang when I'm trying to send them. I don't get a completion screen although they will sometimes still go through. I will have to just start splitting them up after about 30-50 lines. The limit seems to be somewhere in that range.
First off, I'd like us to agree to some ground rules/understandings. My statements about what I believe is the current state of the law should not be conflated with my own personal viewpoints. I don't agree at all that counting those unlawfully present in the US was ever a Great Idea. This and several other governmental actions/policies have created and fostered distinct perverse incentives that have consistently favored the political and societal goals of those who are against political conservatism.
With that line clearly drawn, let's move on.
*President Trump wanted to send us $1,200 months ago, without all the pork! Do normies even know this? *
In defense of the anti-Trump "normies" who shill here, I don't believe that this was ever covered by the Chinese State press.
You know... Uranus could have been Monday if they had invented telescopes earlier. ;) Instead we ended up with Sun Day, Moon Day, Tew's Day, Woden's Day, Thor's Day Freya Day and Saturn Day. The old names for Mars, Mercury and Jupiter were of course, Tew, Woden and Thor.
Yay! Harmonica Virgins!
Or Harmonic Convergence. Whatever.
You are thusly riddled. I can also mark your words if you need. There is a nominal service fee of course.
But was he wearing his mask at the time?
I'm not sure if you got my reply. It probably was too long. I started going through the opinion and the dissent. If that's what you wanted me to do, I can break it up into smaller bits and send it to you. You asked me if I'd read the article. Well now I have. The article doesn't offer any analysis. It states that the same case will be back before scotus next year. Procedurally that's absolutely impossible since scotus ordered both a remand and also an order to dismiss.
i haven't read sundance's take. if you provide a link i'll check it out.
The remedy is to sue any government official in federal court who makes good on an unconstitutional threat to make a frivolous bar complaint, or who directs another person to file a frivolous complaint.
She has all the force and conviction of a rusty garden gate. I'll wager that she's not going to do anything. But that shouldn't stop anyone from reposting her words verbatim next time she is seeking reelection.
"Michigan AG Dana Nessel -- She Threatens to Enforce the Law as She Sees Fit"