Lake Erie Conservative

thoughtful discussion(s) about issue(s)

Posts Tagged ‘United States federal judge’

… Here We Go [plural marriage ruling in Utah] …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Monday,December 16th,2013

.. ever since Windsor v US and Hollingsworth v Perry came out , people have been warning about this . They brought out warnings about it long before those 2 rulings emerged from the last U.S. Supreme Court term . Now , it gets much worse ..

.. the cause of so – called ” gay marriage ” continues to advance . Gays and lesbians are continuing their unabashed legal offensives , even against states who have constitutional prohibitions against this immoral offense . The radicals in the federal judiciary continue to accomodate them . How gross is that ?

.. ” Gay Marriage ” is unnatural and immoral . It must not be allowed to happen . Marriage is the natural and moral coupling between one man and one woman . It is that simple , folks . That is it …

[h/t —]

.. Now , this . A federal judge in Utah has ruled that major parts of the state ‘ s polygamy prohibition law are unconstitutional . Yes , unconstitutional . Yea , amazingly enough … [article]

[update] [h/t —]

.. an update to this — the ruling is not quite that dire , at least not yet . It does effectively de – criminalize polygamy in Utah . No , the state will not touch this . It cannot . Utah ‘ s admission to the United States was made on condition that you-know-what was banned . So , they cannot go back on this .

.. However , the courts can act in this area . I expect them to continue to do so . The TLC ” Sister Wives  ” could appeal the partts of the ruling that they lost . The state will likely appeal , itself . Since Utah is in the 10th Federal Appeallate Circuit , they have a decent chance of winning an appeal . Not great , but a decent chance .

.. LEC here — given the legal environment , especially with those two ” gay marriage ” cases and Lawrence v Texas , eventually polygamy will be legalized . Not that I like it . I do not , not at all . Given the appalling lack of quality of judges that His Lordship is appointing to the bench , one should not be surprised …


Posted in constitutional opinion, legal opinion, personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… I Do Not Blame Sheriff Joe for resisting

Posted by paulfromwloh on Saturday,August 17th,2013

.. he is in the right , and the activist judge and the Department of InJustice are both very badly in the wrong .

.. When you have a great number of illegals causing a great deal of crime , what hey will hide in areas where they will not stand

speaking in Phoenix, Arizona on February 26, 2011.

… Sheriff Joe Arpaio … (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

out . They will try to blend in , and be near family , and in areas where there are a signigifcant number of fellow latinos . So , what is a tough – as – nails law enforcer to do ?

.. Fight . Fight like Hell . Enforce the law , and do so in an equal opportunity manner . It will be one that will piss a great many people off . Tough cookies . That is what these folks are there for .

.. Arizona is similar in size to my home state of Ohio . Ohio has 88 counties . Arizona has only 15 counties . Ohio is along a peaceful and placid border , that being a water border with Canada . Arizona and its fellow states are a land border , and that one is most definitely violent and chaotic and unsecure , with Mexico .

.. We need to do a great deal more , and in a lot more areas in order to aid the immigration problem . The Border Patrol needs to be greatly increased in size to help . Different ideas need to be used , such as drones , and sensors , and others , in order to stretch both personnel and resources . Political support needs to be maintained , so that the improved acts are not reversed . That is what needs to be done .

Sheriff Joe Files to Oppose Racial Profiling Monitor

Saturday, 17 Aug 2013 07:42 AM


More . . .

A A |

Email Us |

Print |

Forward Article



Outspoken Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio is opposing the appointment of an independent monitor and other moves to address a judge’s finding that his agency racially profiled Latinos, according to a court filing on Friday.

The move could result in a judge ordering the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office to comply with constitutional requirements that ban the practice.

In May, U.S. District Judge Murray Snow found that Arpaio’s office singled out Latinos, and that deputies unreasonably prolonged detentions, marking the first finding by a court that the agency engages in racial profiling.

Arpaio’s office is appealing.

Snow delayed issuing orders in the case in June after both parties indicated they wanted time to work toward an agreement.

The joint filing on Friday indicated the judge would have to provide more guidance during an Aug. 30 status conference given the lack of agreement on a proposed consent decree.

In the filing, the parties indicated they have “engaged in good faith discussions” and were able to reach agreement on some terms but remained at odds over several major points, including having a court-appointed monitor oversee the department’s compliance with the court’s ruling.

Snow’s May ruling came after a small group of Latinos sued the Sheriff’s Office for violating their constitutional rights.

The sheriff rejected a similar proposal last year when the U.S. Justice Department leveled racial profiling allegations against the agency.

Arpaio says allowing a monitor means every policy decision would have to be cleared through an observer and would nullify his authority.

“If the court were to appoint a monitor, the role and authority of such monitor must be reconciled so that the monitor’s role does not supplant the elected sheriff’s authority under the Arizona Constitution and Arizona statute,” lawyers wrote in the latest filing.

However, during the June hearing, Judge Snow made it clear that he planned to assign a federal monitor who would have significant authority to oversee retraining of deputies, among other changes at the office.

Arpaio’s office also opposes the plaintiffs’ proposal to create an advisory board aimed at improving the department’s relationship with the Latino community, as well as an effort it said would force deputies to “subjectively guess as to the race of a driver or passenger.”

Maricopa County Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox, a Democrat, said she wasn’t surprised by the 81-year-old sheriff’s reluctance to agree to key terms but added, “the remedies are coming, like it or not.”

“Without a monitor, who can trust the agreements are being met?” she asked.

Judge Snow’s ruling doesn’t altogether bar Arpaio from enforcing the state’s immigration laws, but it does impose a long list of restrictions on the patrols. They include prohibitions on using race as a factor in deciding whether to stop a vehicle with a Latino occupant and on detaining Latino passengers only on the suspicion that they’re in the country illegally.

The case that led to Snow’s ruling focused on Latinos who were stopped during both routine traffic patrols and special immigration patrols known as sweeps.

During the sweeps, deputies flood an area of a city — in some cases, heavily Latino areas — over several days to seek out traffic violators and arrest other offenders. Immigrants who were in the country illegally accounted for 57 percent of the 1,500 people arrested in the 20 sweeps conducted by Arpaio’s office since January 2008.

The federal Justice Department filed a lawsuit last year that also alleges racial profiling in Arpaio’s immigration patrols. The federal government’s suit, however, claims broader civil rights violations, such as allegations that Arpaio’s office retaliates against its critics and punishes Latino jail inmates with limited English skills for speaking Spanish. Arpaio has denied the claims.

Read Latest Breaking News from
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Posted in legal opinion, personal opinion, political opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »