Category Archives: Supreme Court

Al Sharpton’s daughter arrested after attacking a NYC cabbie

ashley and al sharpton

I’d say anger management classes should be on the agenda for this “committed activist.”

From Fox News: The Rev. Al Sharpton’s daughter got an unexpected gift early Saturday at her birthday celebration — handcuffs for allegedly attacking a cab driver in New York City, according to reports.

Ashely Sharpton, 30, is accused of shoving and punching the cabbie after snatching his keys in midtown Manhattan just before 1 a.m., it was reported.

“She told me it didn’t happen the way they said it happened but I can’t speak for a 30-year-old woman,” the activist preacher told the New York Daily News. His daughter couldn’t be immediately reached for comment.

The trouble started when Sharpton and three pals hailed the cab. All jumped in and gave different destinations, confusing the cabbie who became annoyed and stopped the vehicle.

He told his passengers he wasn’t going anywhere until they figured out where they wanted to go, the paper reported. Cops said Sharpton, who was sitting next to the cabbie, then snatched the keys from the ignition and jumped out of the cab.

Things got physical when the cabbie got out and tried to grab the keys from Sharpton, telling her, “Give me my keys back,” cops told the New York Post. “I don’t have your keys,” she allegedly spat before later admitting she tossed them, the paper reported.

One of her pals might have given her an awful birthday present by filming the encounter, according to the paper. Cops said the footage shows Ashley Sharpton punching the driver in the chest.

By the time cops arrived she had vanished. Cops found her two hours later on a nearby street.

She was issued a summons to appear in court at a later date, the Post reported. She was charged with petty larceny and criminal possession of stolen property.

“Happy Birthday to my youngest, Ashley,” Sharpton tweeted Friday referring to his daughter. “A strong black woman and committed activist. So proud to be your Dad.”

Ashley Sharpton was one of 16 protesters arrested in January for blocking traffic outside Trump Tower to protest President Trump’s Supreme Court justice nominee Neil Gorsuch.

Prosecutors agreed in March to dismiss the arrest if she stayed out of trouble until Sept. 20, the New York Post reported at the time.

UPDATE (Sept. 12):

Here’s the video of Ashley Sharpton assaulting the cabbie (h/t CP):

DCG

Advertisements

Second Amendment case Peruta vs. California may be heading to Supreme Court

erwin chemerinsky

Dean Erwin Chemerinsky: No right to have concealed weapons

If this does make it to the Supreme Court, I’m certainly hoping for an outcome which favors legal firearm owners.

From Fox News: The Second Amendment is only 27 words, but Americans have used millions of words arguing over what it means. It guarantees “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” But which people, what arms, and under what circumstances?

Two milestone cases involving the Second Amendment that reached the Supreme Court are District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), declaring an individual has a right to own a firearm, and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), affirming the Second Amendment applies to state law.

Now, if the Supreme Court decides to hear it, there may be a third major case in a decade: Peruta v. California.

At issue is the right to keep and bear arms outside the home. The Heller case specifically applies to situations within the home. Those who have petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case are hoping the justices will see it as a logical extension of their earlier opinions.

The case arose when Edward Peruta and other gun owners who lived in or near San Diego, Calif., couldn’t get concealed-carry permits in their county. The Sheriff’s Department handles permit requests and requires “good cause” to carry a gun outside of the home. This does not mean a generalized concern for safety, but something specific, such as fear of domestic violence or a regular need to move large amounts of money.

There were two separate lawsuits challenging the interpretation of “good cause,” but the district courts found no violation of the Second Amendment.

Then, in 2014, a three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the policy did indeed violate the right to bear arms for self-defense. The state, however, got a new hearing in front of 11 9th Circuit judges, who decided 7-4, the restrictions for concealed-carry permits were allowable.

The case has now been appealed to the Supreme Court and though the Justices have rescheduled its consideration several times, some experts feel the court is finally ready to hear Peruta.

“I suspect they’re going to grant it,” said John Eastman, former law dean at Chapman University and the director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence. Eastman told Fox News, “it’s percolating all across the country.”

He also feels the justices may have put it off while waiting for a full complement on the court, which they got when Neil Gorsuch was confirmed last month. Gorsuch, in fact, may be the justice to tip the opinion in one direction or the other, as previous Second Amendment cases were determined in a 5-4 ruling.

According to Eugene Volokh, professor of law at University of California at Los Angeles, this case is primed for the Supreme Court, as it deals with a basic constitutional right and “the lower courts are split on the issue.”

It would be a good time for the highest court to step in and settle the controversy. He also feels that while no one is sure how Gorsuch will vote, there is a “sense that he’s sympathetic to a broader view” of the Second Amendment.

The case may turn on how the court frames the issue. To Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Irvine School of Law, the legal question to be settled is whether a state like California may determine its own rules on concealed-carry permits.

“The Second Amendment isn’t an absolute right,” Chemerinsky notes. Throughout British and American history, “there’s never been a right to have concealed weapons.”

But Eugene Volokh believes there’s a bigger issue at stake. If the state of California, which essentially bans open carry of a gun, makes it next to impossible for a typical citizen to get a concealed-carry permit, this is “tantamount to banning” the right to bear arms “except for a few favored people.”

Experts agree on one point. As Chemerinsky puts it, if Peruta is taken up, “no matter what the Supreme Court says, it will be a landmark decision.”

DCG

President Hillary Rodham Clinton’s first 100 days

That President Trump is continuing the neoCon’s foreign policy in Syria is disheartening.

That Trump has elevated his daughter and son-in-law, Ivanka and Jared Kushner, to senior White House advisory positions although neither has any qualifications, is disheartening.

But whatever our unhappiness with Trump, just remember a President Hillary Rodham Clinton would be infinitely worse.

Assessing President Rodham Clinton’s first 100 days

By Howard Hyde ⋅ May 5, 2017

Having closed out the first one hundred days of the new administration, an assessment of the new president’s accomplishments is in order.

By any objective historical measure, the achievements of President Hillary Rodham Clinton have been extraordinary.  Let’s start with the Budget and Defense One-Two Punch.  The Omnibus Budget Act of 2017, passed by Congress and signed by the president in record time, calls for beefy increases in the budgets of the administration’s surrogate agencies: a 31% increase for the EPA, a 6% increase for the Department of Energy, and a 12% increase for the Department of the Interior, to name just a few.  All of these increases have been offset dollar-for-dollar either by reductions in spending for the Pentagon and Department of Defense or by increases in taxes on the rich.  “The era of the American military being used to intimidate and assault the freedom-loving people of the world is over,” Clinton is alleged to have proclaimed.

Some critics of Clinton’s budget have suggested that she is merely trading the externally facing military for the domestic-facing para-military, noting that many of the increases to the agencies are earmarked for “energetic and proactive enforcement” of regulations and that procurement requests for weapons and ammunition for the EPA’s various SWAT teams have already increased since passage of the budget.

The First Amendment has undergone a refreshing rebranding under the Clinton administration.  “Hate groups, hateful individuals and hate speech will no longer be permitted to hide behind the Bill of Rights, like terrorists using civilian children as human shields” (also alleged but not disputed).  Accordingly, all universities that accept federal funding, or that accept students who have taken federal student loans or grants, have been advised to follow the leadership of the University of California, Berkeley in setting standards for who may be allowed to speak on campus.  Dozens of “Tea Party” groups have lost their tax-exempt status.  “Lois Lerner was too lenient,” one staffer remarked off the record.  “We are cracking down for real this time.”

Gun violence should be seeing a substantial reduction under the Clinton administration now that the national gun registry database is actively integrating records from state-level sales and other sources, and with mandatory universal enrollment required of all firearm owners before year’s end.  At least one source close to the administration has said candidly off the record that “the die is cast.  Before the end of the first HRC term, we’ll have [confiscated] all of their guns.”  When asked what about those gun owners who would not be willing to give up their guns regardless of cost to themselves, the same staffer shrugged.  “Then they will pay that cost.”

“Syrian” “refugees” and sanctuary cities are thriving in America.

Due to the untimely death of Justice Antonin Scalia and the precipitous retirement in February of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Clinton has been given her golden opportunity to railroad through her picks for the Supreme Court.  As a result, Elizabeth Warren is on track to become the first Native American female justice, with Loretta Lynch not far behind (with the competing double-credential of first black woman – which will triumph?).  Those irritating challenges to the constitutionality of the administration’s agenda from freedom of speech to gun control will all be DOA.

And of course, Obamacare is on the point of being repealed and replaced…with a single-payer system run exclusively by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in close consultation with the Veterans Administration and the Bureau of Indian Affairs: “America (finally) Cares.”

(End of nightmare fantasy.  We now return you to your regularly scheduled life.)

Regardless of any failing of the Trump administration, “bullet” is far too feeble a word to describe what we as a nation have dodged.

Howard Hyde is editor of www.CitizenEcon.com, fellow of the American Freedom Alliance, and author of the books Pull the Plug on Obamacare (2013) and Escape From Berkeley: An EX liberal progressive socialist embraces America (and doesn’t apologize) (2016).

Howard Hyde is actually too soft on President Hillary Rodham Clinton.

An even better picture of President Hillary’s first 100 days can be gleaned from Hillary Clinton’s 100 most damaging WikiLeaks (go to the link for more information on each “most damaging WikiLeaks”):

  1. Obama lied: he knew about Hillary’s secret server and wrote to her using a pseudonym, cover-up happened (intent to destroy evidence).
  2. Hillary Clinton dreams of completely “open borders”.
  3. Hillary Clinton received money from and supported nations that she KNEW funded ISIS and terrorists.
  4. Hillary has public positions on policy and her private ones.
  5. Paying people to incite violence and unrest at Trump rallies.
  6. Hillary’s campaign wants “unaware” and “compliant” citizens.
  7. Top Hillary aides mock Catholics for their faith.
  8. Hillary deleted her incriminating emails. State covered it up. Asked about using White House executive privilege to hide from Congress.
  9. Bribery: King of Morocco gave Clinton Foundation $12 million for a meeting with Hillary, 6 months later Morocco gets weapons.
  10. “Spirit Cooking” (Warning: satanic/extremely graphic).
  11. State Department tried to bribe FBI to un-classify Clinton emails (FBI docs).
  12. Hillary caught on tape about rigging the Palestine election (audio).
  13. Latinos are “needy”. Latino outreach is “taco bowl engagement”.
  14. Clinton campaign was in direct communication with DOJ regarding Hillary’s investigation.
  15. Bill Clinton receives $1 million “birthday gift” from ISIS-funding Qatar while Hillary was SoS, Qatar receives arms flow increases of 1,482%.
  16. Hillary cheated in debates: DNC head Donna Brazile caught giving MULTIPLE debate questions to Hillary.
  17. Hillary campaign prays for shooters in news stories to be white.
  18. Rigging the primaries against Bernie Sanders (DNC favored Hillary).
  19. Rigging the primaries against Bernie Sanders (Hillary’s team).
  20. Hillary was hateful, neglectful, above the law, “contemptuous” to her security detail, and “blatantly disregarded” security, (FBI docs)
  21. Clinton Foundation schemed with Big Pharma: keep the price of AIDS drugs high in America and NO to cheaper generic versions.
  22. Democrats created fake Trump “grope under the meeting table” Craigslist employment ad in May 2016.
  23. Hillary’s camp excited about a black teen’s murder (to help her agenda).
  24. Rigging media polls through oversampling.
  25. “Bill Clinton Inc.” How millions of dollars were raised for the Clintons. Blurred lines between personal and Foundation money.
  26. Hillary sold 20% of America’s uranium to Russia as Secretary of State. Clinton camp worried that the deal is being investigated.
  27. Hillary is still privately against gay marriage.
  28. Acknowledging radical Islam is a real threat and a “serious problem for our future”.
  29. Admitting terrorists will infiltrate the Syrian refugee program.
  30. Hillary’s poor health (collapsing, memory loss, drug research).
  31. Hillary took money from foreigners for campaign (illegal).
  32. Hillary says climate change activists should “get a life”.
  33. Hillary is pro-fracking, calls it “a gift”, despite what she publicly says.
  34. Referring to a “Shadow Government” that protects Hillary (FBI docs).
  35. List of reporters that Hillary wined and dined, including biggest journalists and pundits of CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, NY Times. Entire “interview” with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes is staged, reading word-for-word.
  36. Democrats using American lobbyists to money launder foreign       donations illegally.
  37. The New York Times colluding with Hillary, allowing quote edits.
  38. Racist remarks about Blacks and Muslims.
  39. Tipped off by the State Department about Benghazi emails.
  40. Hillary’s staff admitting she is “tainted” and “really vulnerable” on corruption and bribery.
  41. Podesta’s very close friend at DOJ in charge of FBI re-opening email investigation, previously gave campaign “heads up”.
  42. Billionaire George Soros has influence over Hillary, ties to election fraud in systems used for U.S. voting.
  43. Clinton campaign refuses to report sexual harassment (then forwards complaint to harasser).
  44. CEO of Google (parent company) working for Hillary Campaign.
  45. Admitting Hillary did not use private server for security reasons (shows intent).
  46. Hillary Clinton “doesn’t seem to know what planet we are all living in at the moment”.
  47. Hillary’s team: She has “the worst judgment” and her “instincts” have led to many problems for campaign.
  48. Are there other emails that Hillary didn’t release to Congress? “Definitely”.
  49. Obama elevated Malaysia on the human rights list JUST to let Malaysia into TPP.
  50. Big media collusion email, working with reporters.
  51. Using female senator to conjure fake sexist claims against Bernie.
  52. Hillary campaign caught partaking in insider trading (illegal).
  53. Hillary Clinton bragged about being invited to Putin’s “Inner Sanctum”.
  54. Hillary needed to be reminded to NOT to discuss foreign policy intel over private email server.
  55. John Podesta’s password was p@sswOrd.
  56. Hillary Clinton had to be told when to smile during speeches.
  57. “Bernie needs to be ground to a pulp” and more.
  58. Disney, ABC head is colluding with Hillary’s campaign.
  59. Coordinating with SuperPACs, which is illegal.
  60. Hillary’s team admitting she lies a lot.
  61. Plotting to attack Obama because “his father was a Muslim”.
  62. Colluding over withholding Benghazi emails.
  63. Hillary plans to support the TPP.
  64. Entire “interview” with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes is staged, reading word-for-word.
  65. Hillary Clinton stole furniture from the State Department (FBI docs).
  66. Hillary told Tim Kaine back in July 2015 he would be VP.
  67. Hillary tweaks her policies based on donors’ wants.
  68. “…go through all the emails and pull the official ones”
  69. Hillary sends U.S. intelligence and war plans to Podesta’s hacked email.
  70. Hillary’s team admits to knowing of classified material in emails.
  71. NBC colluded with the Clinton campaign.
  72. Avoiding the press because of tough questions.
  73. Clinton Foundation did not pay for the services they received.
  74. Illegally coordinating with Priorities USA, a SuperPAC funded by George Soros.
  75. Conflict of interest: Bill was personally paid and received gifts from CGI sponsors.
  76. Man who ran ‘Bill Clinton Inc.’: “I’m also starting to worry that if this story gets out, we are screwed”.
  77. Podesta illegally has access to top secret information.
  78. Podesta connects to unsecure network where anyone could access.
  79. Hillary’s speechwriters: “I don’t mind the ‘backs of dead Americans’ because we need a bit of moral outrage.” (Benghazi)
  80. Admitting Hillary failed foreign policy.
  81. The AP colluding with the Hillary campaign.
  82. Hillary camp using “propaganda”.
  83. Hillary’s camp says she has a “character problem” and is “arrogant”.
  84. Staging fake anti-Trump protest, conspiring with Univision CEO.
  85. Meeting to go over Cheryl Mills’ testimony to FBI/Congress.
  86. Journalist talks strategy with Clinton staff and asks for permission to write article.
  87. Violating campaign finance law.
  88. Proof that ‘Correct the Record’ (SuperPAC) is directly coordinating with the Hillary campaign against federal campaign law.
  89. Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg in direct contact with the Hillary campaign.
  90. Hillary’s team working with hundreds of MSM news pundits.
  91. Admitting Obamacare isn’t working.
  92. Hillary tries to hide her tiny rallies.
  93. Hillary had a mole working on Biden’s team.
  94. John Oliver caught colluding with Hillary’s campaign.
  95. Politico’s Glenn Thrush colluding with Hillary’s campaign, admits to being a “hack”.
  96. “We are finishing up the next round of TV scripts”
  97. ‘The Huffington Post’ colluded with Hillary.
  98. Clinton campaign memorized their email cover-up script.
  99. Heavy press collusion over Cuba and Hillary’s health.
  100. Obama picked people in his administration from the suggestion list of CiTi bank advisor/Wall St shill.

H/t Thought Crime Radio

~Eowyn

Washington state school district halts international trips

illegalSeems to me it’s the ideal moment to provide illegal aliens with an education on how to become a legal citizen.

From MyNorthwest.com: A school district in Washington halted all international field trips over concerns students in the country illegally wouldn’t be able to get back in.

The Seattle Times reports that the Kent School District’s Board of Directors announced the decision Wednesday. The decision immediately canceled an education exchange to Osaka, Japan, and a band trip to Victoria, British Columbia, in Canada.

District spokesman Chris Loftis says confusing messages from President Donald Trump’s administration caused uncertainty about whether students would be allowed back into the U.S.

Loftis says the district doesn’t track students’ immigration status because of a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision that says it’s unconstitutional to deny children in the country illegally a free and public education.

The school district says it has students from 100 countries.

DCG

US appeals court upholds Maryland assault weapons ban

debbie ar15

Me shooting a “weapon of war.” Molṑn Labé.

Next stop: SCOTUS.

From Fox News: Maryland’s ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday by a federal appeals court in a decision that met with a strongly worded dissent.

In a 10-4 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., said the guns banned under Maryland’s law aren’t protected by the Second Amendment.

“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.

Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, who led the push for the law in 2013 as a state senator, said it’s “unthinkable that these weapons of war, weapons that caused the carnage in Newtown and in other communities across the country, would be protected by the Second Amendment.”

“It’s a very strong opinion, and it has national significance, both because it’s en-banc and for the strength of its decision,” Frosh said, noting that all of the court’s judges participated.

Judge William Traxler issued a dissent. By concluding the Second Amendment doesn’t even apply, Traxler wrote, the majority “has gone to greater lengths than any other court to eviscerate the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.” He also wrote that the court did not apply a strict enough review on the constitutionality of the law.

“For a law-abiding citizen who, for whatever reason, chooses to protect his home with a semi-automatic rifle instead of a semi-automatic handgun, Maryland’s law clearly imposes a significant burden on the exercise of the right to arm oneself at home, and it should at least be subject to strict scrutiny review before it is allowed to stand,” Traxler wrote.

National Rifle Association spokeswoman Jennifer Baker said, “It is absurd to hold that the most popular rifle in America is not a protected arm' under the Second Amendment."</strong> She added that the majority opinion "clearly ignores the Supreme Court's guidance from District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment protects arms that arein common use at the time for lawful purposes like self-defense.”‘

The NRA estimates there are 5 million to 10 million AR-15s — one of the weapons banned under Maryland’s law — in circulation in the United States for lawful purposes. Asked about an appeal, Baker said the NRA is exploring all options.

But Elizabeth Banach, executive director of Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence, said the decision is “overwhelming proof that reasonable measures to prevent gun violence are constitutional.”

“Maryland’s law needs to become a national model of evidence-based policies that will reduce gun violence,” Banach wrote in a statement.

U.S. District Judge Catherine Blake upheld the ban in 2015, but a divided three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that she didn’t apply the proper legal standard. The panel sent the case back to Blake and ordered her to apply “strict scrutiny,” a more rigorous test of a law’s constitutionality. The state appealed to the full appeals court.

Maryland passed the sweeping gun-control measure after the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre that killed 20 children and six educators in Connecticut. King mentioned the massacre at the start of the ruling.

“Both before and after Newtown, similar military-style rifles and detachable magazines have been used to perpetrate mass shootings in places whose names have become synonymous with the slaughters that occurred there,” King wrote. He listed the 2012 shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado; the December 2015 shootings in San Bernardino, California; and the shootings last year at an Orlando, Florida, nightclub, where 49 people were killed and 53 injured.

King also noted that enacting the law is “precisely the type of judgment that legislatures are allowed to make without second-guessing by a court.”

“Simply put, the State has shown all that is required: a reasonable, if not perfect, fit between the (Firearms Safety Act) and Maryland’s interest in protecting public safety,” King wrote.

DCG

Court rules that Florida doctors can ask patients about guns and gun safety

adalberto-jordan

Circuit Court Judge Adalberto Jordan

Guns, what guns?

From Fox News: A federal appeals court ruled on Thursday that Florida doctors can talk to patients about gun safety, declaring a law aimed at restricting such discussions a violation of the First Amendment’s right to free speech.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law does not trespass on patients’ Second Amendment rights to own guns and noted a patient who doesn’t want to be questioned about that can easily find another doctor.

“The Second Amendment right to own and possess firearms does not preclude questions about, commentary on, or criticism for the exercise of that right,” wrote Circuit Judge Adalberto Jordan (appointed by Obama and born in Cuba) in one of two majority opinions covering 90 pages. “There is no actual conflict between the First Amendment rights of doctors and medical professionals and the Second Amendment rights of patients.”

Circuit Judge William Pryor, who was a finalist in President Donald Trump’s search for a Supreme Court nominee, said in a separate concurring opinion that the First Amendment must protect all points of view.

“The promise of free speech is that even when one holds an unpopular point of view, the state cannot stifle it,” he wrote. “The price Americans pay for this freedom is that the rule remains unchanged regardless of who is in the majority.”

The law was passed in 2011 and signed by Republican Gov. Rick Scott with strong support from the National Rifle Association. It was the only one of its kind in the nation, although similar laws have been considered in other states.

Supporters in the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature insisted it was necessary because doctors were overstepping their bounds and pushing an anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment agenda.

The law was challenged almost immediately by thousands of physicians, medical organizations and other groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union as a violation of free speech in what became known as the “Docs v. Glocks” case. A legal battle has raged in the courts since then, with several conflicting opinions issued.

“We are thrilled that the court has finally put to bed the nonsensical and dangerous idea that a doctor speaking with a patient about gun safety somehow threatens the right to own a gun,” said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida.

The 11th Circuit noted that Florida lawmakers appeared to base the law on “six anecdotes” about physicians’ discussions of guns in their examination rooms and little other concrete evidence that there is an actual problem. And doctors who violated the law could face professional discipline, a fine or possibly loss of their medical licenses.

“There was no evidence whatsoever before the Florida Legislature that any doctors or medical professionals have taken away patients’ firearms or otherwise infringed on patients’ Second Amendment rights,” Jordan wrote for the court.

The NRA and Florida attorneys had argued that under the law doctors could ask about firearms if the questions were relevant to a patient’s health or safety, or someone else’s safety, and that the law was aimed at eliminating harassment of gun owners. But the 11th Circuit said there was no evidence of harassment or improper disclosure of gun ownership in health records, as law supporters also claimed.

“There is nothing in the record suggesting that patients who are bothered or offended by such questions are psychologically unable to choose another medical provider, just as they are permitted to do if their doctor asks too many questions about private matters like sexual activity, alcohol consumption, or drug use,” the court ruled.

The ruling did determine that some parts of the law could remain on the books, such as provisions allowing patients to decline to answer questions about guns and prohibiting health insurance companies from denying coverage or increasing premiums for people who lawfully own guns.

The case will return to U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke in Miami for a ruling that follows the 11th Circuit’s direction. The case could, however, also be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

DCG

Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg favors decriminalizing pedophilia and child sex trafficking

The legal definition of “age of consent” is:

Age of consent refers to the legally defined age at which a person is no longer required to obtain parental consent to get married. It also refers to the age at which a person is held to have the capacity to voluntarily agree to sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse with a person under the age of consent may lead to criminal charges of statutory rape or sexual assault . . . .

Statutory rape is sex between an adult and a minor below the age of consent. Every state has a statutory rape law in some form. The age of consent varies from state to state, but is generally from 16 – 18 years of age. . . . Consent of the victim and belief that the victim is of the age of consent are usually considered immaterial.

A pedophile is an adult with “sexual fondness for and activity” with children, i.e., minors below the age of consent. Pedophilia is legally defined as sexual child abuse, i.e., any sexual activity with a minor below the age of consent, which includes fondling a child’s genitals, intercourse, incest, rape, sodomy, exhibitionism, and commercial exploitation of children through prostitution or the production of pornographic materials.

Since the age of consent in the United States which varies from state to state is  from 16 to 18, lowering the age of consent to 12 would legalize pedophilia of children age 12 and above.

That is exactly what Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Clinton appointee and daughter of Russian Jewish immigrants, recommends in a co-authored book that led to sweeping changes made by the federal government in the name of sex equality.

ruth-bader-ginsburg

In 1977 when Ginsburg was General Counsel of the ACLU, she co-authored (with Brenda Feigen-Fasteau) Sex Bias in the U.S. Code: A Report of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which was published by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights in April 1977, for which Ginsburg and Feigen-Fasteau were paid with federal funds under Contract No. CR3AK010.

The 230-page Sex Bias in the U.S. Code identifies hundreds of federal laws alleged to discriminate against women and recommends an avalanche of government and social changes, including:

  • Military draft and combat duty for women.
  • Legalization of prostitution (see pages 97, 99, 215-216 of Sex Bias in the U.S. Code)
  • Sex integration of prisons, reformatories, schools and colleges and their activities (including sports), all-girls and all-boys organizations, and fraternities and sororities.
  • Changing the names of the Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts and Big Brothers of America to reflect sex integration (see pages 145, 205 of Sex Bias in the U.S. Code).
  • Elimination of the traditional family concept of husband as breadwinner and wife as homemaker.
  • Comprehensive government child-care.
  • Adoption of sex-neutral language, e.g., “artificial” instead of “manmade”; “person, human” instead of “man, woman”; and plural nouns “they” and “them” instead of “singular third person pronouns”. At the same time, however, Ginsburg and Feigen-Fasteau hypocritically insist that the U.S. Department of Labor retains its “Women’s Bureau”.

On p. 102 of Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, under the sub-heading “Recommendations,” Ginsburg and Feigen-Fasteau recommend a revision of 18 U.S.C. §2032 from “carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years” to “A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, not his spouse, and . . . the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old“. Below is the pertinent paragraph:

18 U.S.C. §2032 — Eliminate the phrase “carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years” and substitute a Federal, sex-neutral definition of the offense patterned after S. 1400 §1633: A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, not his spouse, and (1) compels the other person to participate: (A) by force or (B) by threatening or placing the other person in fear that any person will imminently be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping; (2) has substantially impaired the other person’s power to appraise or control the conduct by administering or employing a drug or intoxicant without the knowledge or against the will of such other person, or by other means; or (3) the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old.

Ginsburg (and her co-author) also recommends that the Mann Act be repealed. The Mann Act is a federal law passed in 1910 which makes it a felony to engage in interstate or foreign commerce transport of “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose”.

From Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, pp. 98-99:

The Mann Act . . . poses the invasion of privacy issue in an acute form. The Mann Act also is offensive because of the image of women it perpetuates . . . . It was meant to protect from ‘the villainous interstate and international traffic in women and girls,’ ‘those women and girls who, if given a fair chance, would, in all human probability, have been good wives and mothers and useful citizens. . . .’

In other words, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg has her way, sexual abuse of children 12-years or older would not be a crime, nor would child sex trafficking.

Ginsburg will be 84 next month. May President Trump be given the opportunity to nominate her replacement on the Supreme Court.

H/t Executive Director of Eagle Forum Susan Hirschmann’s Testimony Re. Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Senate Judiciary Committee, July 23, 1993.

See also:

This post was revised on February 23, 2017.

~Eowyn