Monthly Archives: May 2020

Libertarianism, SCOTUS For The Average Joe

Average Joe SCOTUS: Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org

Leave a comment

The issue at play in this case, is the government edicts doctrine, which basically goes like this. Government cannot copyright their fucking laws. Meaning, they can’t pass a law, and then get pissed that someone reprints it verbatim elsewhere, like other copyrights.

The reason for this, is that we are a government by the people and for the people, and all people should have equal access to the laws that govern them. So if government copyrighted something, and you could only get it from government (potentially with some fee attached), you may not have good access to it, where someone else might have given it to you another way.

So, now to this case. Georgia has this thing they call The Official Code of Georgia Annotated (OCGA). It’s a book of all their laws and shit, with annotations explaining stuff. The annotations aren’t law, but they’re still from Georgia Lawmakers, and then printed and published by a private company.

Public.Resource.Org (PRO), being the nice people they are, try to put out all laws for people to have easy access to them. So they bought the OCGA, scanned that motherfucker, and put it out.

Georgia was like, “Hey motherfucker, you can’t do that. Sure our laws are in there, but there’s a bunch of other shit too. You can’t print that. It’s a copyright violation.”

But PRO was like, “Fuck you, assholes. These are official government documents, both laws, and explanations of the law, and therefore the government edict doctrine mentioned earlier applies. So you can take your cease-and-desist order, and shove it sideways up your whole ass.”

The 11th circuit court of appeals agreed with PRO, and told Georgia to eat a bag of dicks. So Georgia asked for SCOTUS to hook them up, and here we are.

SCOTUS in a non-partisan split decision was unimpressed with the state of Georgia and their shitty argument, siding 5-4 for Public.Resource.org. That the idea the annotations are copyrightable but laws aren’t is fucking stupid, and anyone who interprets it that way are fucking idiots.

SCOTUS For The Average Joe

Average Joe SCOTUS: Barton v. Barr

Leave a comment
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(1)
(a)Cancellation of removal for certain permanent residents. The Attorney General may cancel removal in the case of an alien who is inadmissible or deportable from the United States if the alien—

(1)

has been an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence for not less than 5 years,

(2)

has resided in the United States continuously for 7 years after having been admitted in any status, and

(3)

has not been convicted of any aggravated felony.

(d)Special rules relating to continuous residence or physical presence

(1)Termination of continuous period

For purposes of this section, any period of continuous residence or continuous physical presence in the United States shall be deemed to end (A) except in the case of an alien who applies for cancellation of removal under subsection (b)(2), when the alien is served a notice to appear under section 1229(a) of this title, or (B) when the alien has committed an offense referred to in section 1182(a)(2) of this title that renders the alien inadmissible to the United States under section 1182(a)(2) of this title or removable from the United States under section 1227(a)(2) or 1227(a)(4) of this title, whichever is earliest.

Jamaican Andre Barton came into the U.S. in 1989 under a visa. In 1992, he applied for permanent status, and received it. In 1996, just under being here for seven years, this dumb motherfucker decided to break bad, and got his dumb ass busted for felony assault, destruction of property, and having a firearm during the commission of a felony. Then in 2007/08 he was charged for, but not convicted of, violating the Georgia Controlled Substances Act

So now, Homeland security was like, “Fuck you buddy, Ja-makin’ us mad. Pack your shit and get out.”

The law says if you do this shit under seven years of being here, your ass can be kicked to the curb.

Barton however was like, “Motherfucker, I’ve been here like 20 fucking years, so I don’t know where you fucking learned math, but that’s more than seven. I’m staying.”

But Homeland Security was like, “Listen asshole, your crimes were committed in just under seven years of being here, and we were cool as shit with you then. But now you’ve went and been an asshole again. There’s this time-stop rule thing we’re gonna deploy here, that says your fucking clock on being here stopped when you committed your felonies in 1996. So again, pack your shit, and get the fuck out.”

Barton’s counsel, being the clever fuck they are, noted that as said above:

(B) when the alien has committed an offense referred to in section 1182(a)(2) of this title that renders the alien inadmissible to the United States under section 1182(a)(2) of this title or removable from the United States under section 1227(a)(2) or 1227(a)(4) of this title, whichever is earliest.

Counsel noted that it had certain rules for being inadmissable, and other rules for removable. Barton was guilty of “Inadmissable” actions, but not “removable” actions. So Barton’s argument is that he wasn’t applying to be admitted, he was only asking not to have his ass sent back to Jamaica. Therefore, he shouldn’t be subject to removal.

Three lower courts all agreed with immigration, that Barton needs to fuck off and go home. Clearly, congress meant to prevent assholes like Barton from staying here, they just kinda wrote a shitty ambiguous law, because congress sucks balls.

But Barton and his lawyer’s are persistent fucks, and here we are at SCOTUS deciding whether the rule above means that Barton’s clock didn’t stop, and that he’s basically an American now, and doesn’t have to go home, even though he’s a first class asshole.

In a partisan 5-4 split, the right wing of SCOTUS told Barton he could go eat a bag of dicks, but he’d have to do it in Jamaica. Get the fuck out!

SCOTUS For The Average Joe

Average Joe SCOTUS: United States v. Sineneng-Smith

Leave a comment

Shady ass lawyer, Evelyn Sineneng-Smith, was an immigration attorney, who helped mostly Filipino’s who came to the U.S., got jobs, but were here illegally, try to obtain a green card based on their working here honorably.

You see, there was a labor certification process that the U.S. used to use to allow immigrants to stay here if they were productive workers in the country. But that program expired all the way back in 2001.

Sineneng-Smith absolutely knew this shit, but she was like “Fuck it” and kept telling her clients she could help them, citing this process.

Federal law prohibits encouraging people to come here or stay here illegally. So this case hinges on whether she was in violation of said law by bullshitting her clients. Or, if the 1st amendment’s guarantee of free speech allows her to encourage her clients to stay here, even on a bullshit premise.

At one point, Justice Roberts even asked if the law would effectively prosecute a legal immigrant grandma here in the U.S. from encouraging her illegal immigrant daughter to stay here in the U.S. in defiance of immigration law, because she’s been a big help to her.

In a unanimous decision, SCOTUS decided against Sineneng-Smith, but seemed more concerned with the ninth circuit’s ruling for Sineneng-Smith, than they did with the arguments at hand. They cited that the ninth circuit who previously ruled on this case, had abused their discretion in making their ruling. That neither party had argued what the ninth circuit ruled, and therefore, neither party had a right to that ruling.

There’s a “party presentation” rule that basically says, if party A makes one argument, and party B makes another, the court is supposed to rule on which argument is better, and not make up it’s own third argument and rule for that instead.

Hear oral arguments, or read about the case, here.

SCOTUS For The Average Joe

Average Joe SCOTUS: Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian, et al.

Leave a comment

So these Atlantic Richfield Co. (ARCO) peeps sure do like SCOTUS, they’ve been here three god damn times, completely unrelated to each other.  Not important, just thought I’d point that out.

Anyway, ARCO bought up Anaconda Smelter back in 1977. Anaconda Smelter had been in business for nearly 100 years making copper and shit. As a result, they used a lot of harsh-ass chemicals, which they conveniently disposed of in ways that would have environmentalist’s heads explode. They just dumped that shit into the ground.

ARCO ended those operations three years later. However, the people who live in that area, have some fucked up ground water and shit, from 100 years of smelting by Anaconda. And now that Anaconda is owned by ARCO, they want paid.

ARCO has seemingly been pretty cool in this. They didn’t fight the argument from the people that Anaconda had done them wrong, and were largely willing to pay damages. They also worked hand-in-hand with the EPA to clean up the site as best they could according to EPA guidelines.

But, people see a big energy company on the ropes, they see dollar signs, and they want money always. So they decided to go after ARCO for “restoration” damages as well, which basically means they want money to fix up their land, which was damaged by Anaconda, over and above what ARCO was doing with the EPA.

So ARCO was like, “Hold on you motherfuckers. We’re working with the EPA to get your shit cleaned up, and they set the rules. Whatever it is you assholes want from us over and above what we’re doing with the EPA is your own personal bullshit. We have nothing to do with that, and we aren’t responsible for it.”

ARCO also argued that complying with the wishes of these selfish assholes would violate the EPA’s rules, putting them in a position where they’re damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

The people in Montana however, who are suing, are like, “Fuck the EPA, this is our land, not theirs. Who the fuck do they think they are to tell us what’s best for our land? Is this America or Communist Russia?”

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA)  is a law passed by congress for shit just like this. And it largely gives the EPA authority on how to handle such shit, so ARCO was basically saying that the EPA is the arbiter here, not the courts. But the people want paid, and as usual, the courts cannot agree, so here we are at SCOTUS to sort this shit out.

SCOTUS, in a 7-2 decision, decided that the Montana Supreme Court fucked up arguing that landowners were not potentially responsible under CERCLA, and didn’t need the EPA to approve shit for them to act.

SCOTUS also decided unanimously that it had the authority to review the Montana Supreme Court’s judgement, since that judgement can be considered to be a final judgement.

They also decided that CERCLA, a federal regulation,  doesn’t strip Montana Supreme Court of their jurisdiction in the matter. So it should have made a fucking decision, and not wasted SCOTUS’ time.

Hear oral arguments and read about the case here.

SCOTUS For The Average Joe

Average Joe SCOTUS: Kelly v. United States

Leave a comment

Back in 2013, Fort Lee New Jersey’s mayor Mark Sokolich, a Democrat, refused to endorse outspoken (a nice way of saying he’s a prick) then Governor of New Jersey, Republican Christ Christie. Since they’re not even in the same fucking party, kinda makes sense.

Well, two grade A assholes William E. Baroni, Jr. and Bridget Anne Kelly, who worked for the Port Authority in New Jersey, which manages the George Washington Bridge, and who also worked for Christie, decided that they’d get revenge against Sokolich, in the most petty, but kinda humorous way possible.

You see, the bridge has three lanes during rush hour, that are segregated off for people from Fort Lee to use, as part of the interstate agreement between New Jersey and New York.

Kelly and Baroni decided they’d close those lanes, claiming they had to do a traffic study, which backed up traffic for hours for the people of Fort Lee. At one point, a 911 call led to an ambulance getting stuck in this jam, and having to get out and walk to the call. So that’s not cool. But aside from that, it is kinda hilarious.

Anyway, their shenanigans were uncovered, and these mildly comedic assholes were sentenced to prison for the federal crime of fraud.

The argument being, they violated the property rights of the Port Authority doing what they did, because that bridge was the Port Authority’s property to use at that time.

Baroni, Kelly, and their ambulance chaser of a lawyer argue however, that while what they did was petty and immoral (and hilarious), they don’t feel it meets the definition of fraud, because if that’s true, any official who lies about a reason for doing something that would otherwise be perfectly legal, they’re guilty of fraud.

It’s a stretch, but when you’re looking at 18 months of hard time, you’ll say anything I guess. They also argue that the federal government is sticking it’s nose into state government issues, which is counter to the “state’s rights” mantra of most law in the United States.

They also argue, that no fraud was committed. They merely allowed usage to go to a different group of people, they didn’t deny use of the property as a whole. To expand on that, they were basically saying, if they diverted the bridge in such a way, as to use it for personal gain, then they agree they committed fraud. But if you just make a regulatory decision that diverts usage from one citizen to the other, and not for personal gain, that can’t be fraud, otherwise every regulatory decision is potentially fraud if it’s determined the decision for that regulation was one that people felt was wrong.

If all those arguments weren’t ballsy enough, they actually argued that they did in fact do a traffic study. Sure the reasons for doing it were politically motivated, but they did in fact do the damn study. So it can’t be fraud, because they really did do the study. They just did it for petty political reasons. This should win the case for them for no other reason than it’s fucking hilarious.

The United States argument is, that just because they did a study, doesn’t make that shit legit. No one commissioned the study, and the study wasn’t performed in the state’s interest, it was made up for political reasons, for fuck’s sake. Even if there was some sort of data obtained from the study, that doesn’t negate the motive behind it.

SCOTUS heard all these arguments, and unanimously decided that not all corruption arises to the level of a federal crime. They decided that these two assholes are just assholes and not felons. Judgement for Kelly and Baroni.

Read about the case and hear oral arguments here.

Associated Press reported on the decision here.