11–20 of 163 posts
Stifling the first amendment is serious business. When are judges going to be held accountable for their wrong actions?
Here's the article before it was edited: https://web.archive.org/web/20180714180330/http://www.latime...
John Saro Balian, 45, pleaded guilty to one count each of soliciting a bribe, obstruction of justice and making false statements to federal investigators as part of a plea agreement he reached with prosecutors. The document was ordered to be filed under seal but appeared on PACER, a public online database for court documents. I'd say that last part is the part that got LAT in trouble... I rarely support the whole "un…
According to the article, the courts have steadfastly protected this behavior for 90 years.
Stifling the first amendment is serious business. When are judges going to be held accountable for their wrong actions?
IIRC, federal judges can be removed by impeachment. Very unlikely that this judge or any other would be impeached just for a controversial ruling, though: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#...
Here's the article before it was edited: https://web.archive.org/web/20180714180330/http://www.latime...
Regardless of their reasons, it feels very wrong to think a judge or an elected official could even think about regulating free speach. Double wrong for doing to the press. I hope the judge get removed from office. I don't want people like that in charge of justice.
To me, anyways, there's overwhelming anecdotal proof that having some limits on speech correlates (and more than likely contributes) to a safer and more just society without any virulent side effect. This is not a slippery slope.
I think it's good to be vigilant about these things and scrutinize judges and officials though.
Stifling the first amendment is serious business. When are judges going to be held accountable for their wrong actions?
IIRC, federal judges can be removed by impeachment. Very unlikely that this judge or any other would be impeached just for a controversial ruling, though: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#...
https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/impeachments-federal-judg...
That doesn't include how many resigned facing likely impeachment.
Regardless of their reasons, it feels very wrong to think a judge or an elected official could even think about regulating free speach. Double wrong for doing to the press. I hope the judge get removed from office. I don't want people like that in charge of justice.
Some of those I agree with. Some I don't. Point is Supreme Court has rightly ruled Free Speech is not a absolute right. It does not trump all other rights. Nor all the duties/responsibilities we put onto governments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
John Saro Balian, 45, pleaded guilty to one count each of soliciting a bribe, obstruction of justice and making false statements to federal investigators as part of a plea agreement he reached with prosecutors. The document was ordered to be filed under seal but appeared on PACER, a public online database for court documents. I'd say that last part is the part that got LAT in trouble... I rarely support the whole "un…
> "ask for forgiveness not permission" stuff won't fly with many judges... According to the article, the courts have steadfastly protected this behavior for 90 years.
Incidentally, no one would wish to see the cop's family harmed, but it's not like this plea agreement came as a surprise to them, so they already had time to reorganize their lives for security. That makes the seal difficult to justify. Also, the risks they face are mostly due to the cop's actions.
Regardless of their reasons, it feels very wrong to think a judge or an elected official could even think about regulating free speach. Double wrong for doing to the press. I hope the judge get removed from office. I don't want people like that in charge of justice.
I was thinking it would turn out to be one of those bizarre elected judges that the US has. But I think federal judges are all appointed through some resemblance of a sensible process, so I'm at a loss as well.
I believe it was in the Noriega case where the first order to CNN not to publish was made. It was overturned by the 11th Circuit.