From The Spokesman: While his brother is in prison for molesting another child, he comes out with allegations that he too was molested by his brother many years earlier. Now that his brother is about to released after serving 25 years, he is saying that “I want that son of a bitch to never see the light of day again”.
From My Fox 8 in Greensboro NC. Here’s a clip of a police officer telling the public to be wary of stranger danger; that if you take your eyes off of your kid for a second, that they’ll disappear – and then they will have a situation
From The Intelligence: Pennsylvania State Police have started the process for removing as many as 5,000 ex-offenders from the Megan’s Law registry under a state supreme court mandate and a new law.
From The Brunswick News: In response to the recent school shooting, the author of this article seems to conflate being on fire, with stranger danger. He says that we should Regularly drill students on safety procedures for lockdown and ‘active shooter’ scenarios — Our youngest, a child with developmental delays, is well aware of “Stranger Danger,” as well as the particulars of “Stop, Drop and Roll.” Require monthly lockdown drills, tied to the receipt of state or federal grants to improve school security systems and staffing.
From the The College Fix:A student activist publicly called me a rapist with no evidence. Here’s the toll it took on my life. We’re back to the consequences of allegations.
From National Review: Let Them Wear Bracelets
Instead of unconditional release on bond or parole or probation, use GPS monitoring with a cell phone. An argument is made in the article that 4th amendment claims will be raised.
Describe how the travel ban went into effect, not by judges, but by someone filing some action to compel the judge to act
Judges are like umpires in baseball or referees in football or basketball. Their role is to see that the rules of court procedures are followed by both sides. Like the ump, they call ’em as they see ’em, according to the facts and law—without regard to which side is popular (no home field advantage), without regard to who is “favored,” without regard for what the spectators want, and without regard to whether the judge agrees with the law.
One of my personal problems in this area is that given a VERY guilty individual, given a VERY weak prosecutor, a guilty individual may go free – and vice versa. Given a very innocent individual, given an amazingly crafty prosecutor and innocent person could go to prison
But a judge isn’t necessarily interested in the capacity of the attorneys involved. Just the facts ma’am.
Today, many legislators often say: We don’t need to determine if a Bill is unconstitutional because after it becomes a law, eventually someone will challenge it in court and the courts will do their duty to judge the law.
Rational Basis: Rational relationship between purpose and law. No fundamental rights are involved, nor is there any discrimination based on race or gender.
Intermediate scrutiny: Substantial relationship between purpose and law. Certain cases involving discrimination based on gender and in some cases where the government compels a party to make disclosures.
Strict Scrutiny: Compelling purpose and is Narrowly tailored. Cases involving certain fundamental rights such as free speech or discrimination based on race.