BC LAW
Saved by @SteveeRogerr

Tonight we have dissents from both Sotomayor and Breyer in the last instance of the Supreme Court waving the matador's cape for Trump's machinery of death without so much as a word of reasoned justification

 Trump's DOJ has moved with unseemly haste in order to preempt credible legal challenges, and the Court has happily gone along
"This is not justice"
The Supreme Court did not meet the standard required to grant cert before a judgment by the lower court
The actual reason for the extraordinary haste is that the people have chosen a president who opposes the death penalty, and the 6 bloodthirsty Republican-nominated justices want the executions to happen. But this is not a *legal* reason.
And this is a consistent theme with Trump's flurry of last-minute executions. People are executed with important and material legal questions being unresolved because the Court won't allow them to be
The Supreme Court, without explanation, allowed the execution of two prisoners who the state allowed to get COVID-19, increasing the risk that lethal injection tortured them to death.
Brandon Bernard did not kill anybody, and almost certainly only got a capital sentence because the prosecution withheld evidence and elicited false testimony, but was unable to get these claims adjudicated before Trump, Barr, and the Roberts 6 killed him.
Two of the Trump/Barr/Roberts executions almost certainly violated the federal statutory prohibition on executing mentally handicapped people
More on Corey Johnson's case here: https://t.co/GOZEvujyrU
Two of the Trump/Barr/Roberts executions involved prisoners so mentally ill they probably didn't understand wt they were being killed, and who once again did not get a fair hearing for their claims:
A reminder that Lisa Montgomery's mental illnesses and disabilities were largely the product of having her spent her teenage years being gang-raped by her stepfather and abused and trafficked by her mother. Executing her is an unspeakably vile act https://t.co/u1IeJOBp98
The Republican majority of the Roberts Court has, quite simply, refused to adequately perform one of its gravest responsibilities because it fears a democratically elected president will not share their appetite for death. Absolutely appalling.
And keep this in mind when Republican elites give the "but muh judges" defense of supporting 4 years of Trump's depravity. What they want judges to do is stuff like "allow the state to kill a bunch of people, many of them severely mentally handicapped, without due process."
Also worth adding that Dustin Higgs also did not kill anybody. These cases illustrate the idea that the death penalty is applied only to the most serious offenders is farcical https://t.co/3NUlc402bg
Dustin Higgs has officially become the 13th person executed in a last minute flurry of arbitrary violence by the worst president in American history https://t.co/7g3poxWvyG

More from Law

Murray \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8
Murray 🇺🇸...
@Rothbard1776
FIERY OPEN by @JudgeJeanine 🔥“When 100M people vote before an election & a huge portion are mail-in ballots, extraordinary regulatory oversight is required. When election laws are changed for a Presidential Election on the eve of that election, in violation of the

2/ Constitution, extraordinary regulatory oversight is required. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures and leaders. Unfortunately, the AG Bill Barr has proven himself to be anything other than extraordinary. This week, Bill Barr has said that he has not seen fraud

3/ on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election. Really? It’s curious Barr, the head of the DOJ, would affirmatively make a statement on a pending investigation. As a former prosecutor for over 3 decades, I, and virtually everyone similarly situated

4/ know that the DOJ guidelines DO NOT allow comment on investigations. They neither confirm nor deny the existence of any investigation, yet Barr actually goes beyond that, and takes it upon himself, in the midst of a presidential election before some states have certified, as

5/ affidavits alleging fraud continue to come in, before electors have even voted, that there is not sufficient evidence. So why would Barr do that? Why would he not continue an investigation as the evidence continues to come in? Why would he even share information on a pending
LAW
Zoe Tillman
Zoe Tillman
@ZoeTillman
A hearing is underway now in the case of Richard Barnett, one of the Capitol insurrection defs (photographed at Pelosi's desk) — the govt is challenging an Arkansas magistrate judge's release order. Chief Judge Beryl Howell in DC halted his release until she rules on the matter

Prosecutor Mary Dohrmann begins by arguing Barnett flouted laws "in the most brazen and flagrant manner possible" when he breached the Capitol: "He knew exactly what he was doing."

Prosecutor says the note that Barnett left for Pelosi in her office — "Nancy, Bigo was here you bitch" — was "disturbing" and says the photographs of him sitting at Pelosi's desk show that he appears to "relish" the notoriety

Govt says Barnett doesn't have a criminal record, but notes police reports where a caller lodged a complaint that he'd pointed a rifle at a car with a "Black Lives Matter" sticker and, in a separate incident, was carrying around guns in public
LAW
Advertisement
Nagpal Manoj
Nagpal Manoj
@NagpalManoj
Franklin Templeton Update

1. Franklin Templeton (Trustees) - six schemes under winding up - have announced dates of voting to seek consent of Unitholders to wind up. Voting begins 26Dec20 at 9am

2. Supreme Court will continue to hear the case - Next hearing on 9th Dec

(1/n)

Q1: What is the voting about by FT
Ans: To validate/approve decision of Trustees to wind up 6 schemes - both Guj & Knataka Courts said Unitholder consent is mandatory

FT has now agreed to do this and this vote will take ur consent to either wind up the scheme or NOT.

(2/n)

Q2: What are the options in this Voting?

Ans: This will be the first voting. (There will be a second vote, I will explain in thread later)

In this Vote, you will have two options
YES - Wind up Schemes
No - Do not wind up, open them up

You have to choose one option

(3/n)

Q3: Should I vote YES or No?

Ans: There is fatigue in investors as their money is locked up for in these tough Covid times. It's been now over 7 months

Most investors take it as fait accompli to vote YES
FT is exhorting investors to vote YES as the best way ahead

(4/n)

Q4: But how should investors vote? YES or No?

Ans: YES will lead to wind up at a pace defined by winder (the person winds up the scheme). This will lead to best value realisation of underlying assets

NO- Will lead to immediate access to money but not best value for you

(5/n)
LAW
Sizwe sikaMusi
Sizwe sikaMusi
@SizweLo
A Kangaroo Court is a bogus legal proceeding which disregards due process, the law and fairness in pursuit of expediency and desired outcomes, it is usually convened after orders from another similar Kangaroo proceeding

[Thread]


A Kangaroo Court has one purpose: to punish a particular individual regardless of whether he actually broke the law or not. It is conducted in such a way as to make it clear who's in charge (She State), but at the same time impossible to prove that they're abusing their powers

Even before a Kangaroo Court delivers its inevitable guilty verdict, the proceedings are designed to deliver maximum humiliation & misery to its victim. The KC only follows common legal principles when it suits it, but will not hesitate to disregard such if and when necessary

A Kangaroo Court fully operates on the concept of expediency. It's own laws and procedures are sufficiently vague and open-ended to allow it to change them as it goes using its "discretion". If things start going off-course, just change a rule and we're cooking again

Any normal legal proceeding has an unknown outcome, every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Not so in a Kangaroo Court. The outcome of this particular proceeding is a foregone conclusion. The sitting is merely a formality to give a semblance of thoroughness
LAW
Jonathan Urick
Jonathan Urick
@jonathanurick
Hot take: Courts might be able to review the legality of this impeachment, even under current political-question doctrine. Here’s why and how the issue might arise:


Suppose Senate convicts and disqualifies Trump from ever holding federal office. Trump files paperwork to run anyway, but state officials deny his application, citing his Senate impeachment judgment. Trump sues, arguing that the judgment is void.

Normally a legal dispute about a prospective candidates eligibility to run would certainly present a justiciable case or controversy. But are courts bound to accept the Senate impeachment judgment as valid? Maybe not. Here’s why:

According to Article I, “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.” This is a small amount of judicial power vested in Congress. When trying impeachments, the Senate sits as a court.

The Senate’s judicial power includes the power to decide relevant legal questions that arise, such as what procedures are sufficient to constitute a “trial” w/in the Constitution’s meaning. Such legal determinations are conclusive, as SCOTUS held in Nixon v. United States (1993).
LAW

You May Also Like

Delilah S. Dawson
Delilah S. Dawson
@DelilahSDawson
Hello, writers! How about a thread on LITERARY AGENTS? How to get one, how to talk to one, how to keep one happy. Spoiler alert: I am 100% pro agent and can't imagine not having one on my side. 1/

Why would you want a literary agent?
* you want to be traditionally published
* you want someone experienced to help guide your career
* you want to learn how to edit like a pro
* you want to sell foreign and movie rights
* you want answers to your newbie questions 2/

Why you might *NOT* want a literary agent:
* you want to self publish
* you're not willing to compromise on your edits
* you don't think their expertise is worth 15% of your advance
I... can't think this way. Literary agents have been crucial to my career. 3/

So, how do you get a literary agent?
1. Have a finished, revised, edited, polished manuscript.
2. Write a query letter for your book
3. Send your query to agents who rep your genre and are open to submissions
4. Repeat steps 1-4 until you're offered representation. 4/

So, let's go through those four steps. First of all, you must have a finished, revised, edited, polished book, and it must be sellable. That is, you can't sell a 600k picture book or a 40k adult Fantasy, etc. You must read extensively in the genre you're writing. 5/
WRITING
Chuck Wendig
Chuck Wendig
@ChuckWendig
TRUMP: "I've decided to eat babies."

PEOPLE: "He can't eat babies, that's super illegal."

TRUMP, on TV, eating babies, not even cooking them first: "People are saying that I really am the best baby-eater, folks."

NYT: "Trump Vs. Babies: The Rhetoric On Both Sides Must Stop"

Jeff Flake tweets: "It is a sad day in America when this callous man can eat babies live on TV"

Jeff Flake, 10 seconds later, votes to help him install a series of 4,000 new judges that are very, very pro-babyphagia.

Judge Kavanaugh, found drunk in a Capitol Hill closet: "I LIKE BEER. OKAY? I LIKE BEER AND I LIKE BABIES AND THAT'S NOT SO WRONG. THAT'S RIGHT. I LIKE BABIES DIPPED IN BEER. I JUST DIP EM. IN THE BEER. THE BABIES. THE BABIES I EAT. OKAY? THAT'S AMERICA."

Mike Pence, wringing his hands about the baby-eating: "We must take care of our children. Our youngest must be protected on this troubling day."

Mike Pence then invites a Baby Chef to say a prayer.

Twitter Users: "It's a distraction technique! Trump eating babies is trying to DISTRACT YOU from ALL THE OTHER HORRORS, which are themselves distractions from the BABY-EATING. It's DISTRACTIONS ALL THE WAY DOWN."

Trump: *eats tons of babies at a rally*

*literal tons of babies*
POLITICS
Advertisement
\u0b85\u0bb8\u0bcd\u0ba4\u0bbf\u0ba9\u0bbe\u0baa\u0bc1\u0bb0\u0ba4\u0bcd\u0ba4\u0bc1 \u0b85\u0bb0\u0b9a\u0bbf\U0001f478
அஸ்தினாபுரத்து அரசி👸...
@SivaRoobini555
#தினம்_ஒரு_திருவாசகம்
தொல்லை இரும்பிறவிச் சூழும் தளை நீக்கி
அல்லல் அறுத்து ஆனந்தம் ஆக்கியதே – எல்லை
மருவா நெறியளிக்கும் வாதவூர் எங்கோன்
திருவாசகம் என்னும் தேன்

பொருள்:
1.எப்போது ஆரம்பித்தது என அறியப்படமுடியாத தொலை காலமாக (தொல்லை)

2. இருந்து வரும் (இரும்)


3.பிறவிப் பயணத்திலே ஆழ்த்துகின்ற (பிறவி சூழும்)

4.அறியாமையாகிய இடரை (தளை)

5.அகற்றி (நீக்கி),

6.அதன் விளைவால் சுகதுக்கமெனும் துயரங்கள் விலக (அல்லல் அறுத்து),

7.முழுநிறைவாய்த் தன்னுளே இறைவனை உணர்த்துவதே (ஆனந்த மாக்கியதே),

8.பிறந்து இறக்கும் காலவெளிகளில் (எல்லை)

9.பிணைக்காமல் (மருவா)

10.காக்கும் மெய்யறிவினைத் தருகின்ற (நெறியளிக்கும்),

11.என் தலைவனான மாணிக்க வாசகரின் (வாதவூரெங்கோன்)

12.திருவாசகம் எனும் தேன் (திருவா சகமென்னுந் தேன்)

முதல்வரி: பிறவி என்பது முன்வினை விதையால் முளைப்பதோர் பெருமரம். அந்த ‘முன்வினை’ எங்கு ஆரம்பித்தது எனச் சொல்ல இயலாது. ஆனால் ‘அறியாமை’ ஒன்றே ஆசைக்கும்,, அச்சத்துக்கும் காரணம் என்பதால், அவையே வினைகளை விளைவிப்பன என்பதால், தொடர்ந்து வரும் பிறவிகளுக்கு, ‘அறியாமையே’ காரணம்

அறியாமைக்கு ஆரம்பம் கிடையாது. நமக்கு ஒரு பொருளைப் பற்றிய அறிவு எப்போதிருந்து இல்லை? அதைச் சொல்ல முடியாது. அதனாலேதான் முதலடியில், ஆரம்பமில்லாத அஞ்ஞானத்தை பிறவிகளுக்குக் காரணமாகச் சொல்லியது. ஆனால் அறியாமை, அறிவின் எழுச்சியால், அப்போதே முடிந்து விடும்.
ALL
Kevin Murphy
Kevin Murphy
@kwmurphy
Okay look - I didn’t grow up with comic books. But I read stacks of science fiction digests and I kit-bashed model cars into fantasy rods, and just tried to maintain a low profile until I could get out of the house. So you could say I’m a distant cousin of the comic book fan. /1

And sometimes one’s childhood passion follows them into adulthood, sometimes not, sometimes as an adult one finds a passion they never had as a child and embraces it. For me, that must include getting involved with a puppet show at the age of thirty. /2

So who’s to say whose passion’s legitimate and whose is bogus? Nobody. Someone might indict your passion but they have no ground to stand on and should be dismissed out of hand. /3

Maybe they’re envious that you have a passion, maybe they think that their passion is cooler than yours, or maybe they’re just insecure, who knows. Doesn’t matter. /4

What matters is that if something gives you joy, and in the process doesn’t hurt others, then by all means follow it. It’s how we explore our secret hopes, our shadow sides, our inner character. /5
CULTURE
Cookie Cyboid
Cookie Cyboid
@CookieCyboid
“Why are Tumblr and Facebook cracking down on sex so much? And why is Facebook in so over zealous about it? It’s all Apples fault!” Etc etc

I can explain all. It is largely the fault of a set of US laws called SESTA and FOSTA.
TECH