|
sullat posted:
I wish more lawyer jobs involved dismantling white supremacy and opposing fascism. Of course if we can get qualified immunity chucked out then maybe they will.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 19:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Some of us were 3rd amendment stans before it was cool 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
Meanwhile, in Canada
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
Judges are the worst and I wish we had some check against them. Has any country explored that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
I've always wanted to make an argument that the military draft constitutes unlawful involuntary servitude under the Constitution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 21:16
|
|
|
Virtually guaranteed to be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. But defence lawyers across the country are celebrating.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
thehoodie posted:Virtually guaranteed to be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. But defence lawyers across the country are celebrating. With drinks, I imagine
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
intox to the point of non insane automatism SHOULD be vanishingly rare, honestly my concern is just that judges will gently caress it up and turn it into "well, both of them were real drunk, so is it really sex assault?" (they already do that) if s.33.1 is ruled unconstitutional at the SCC they'll create a new general intent offence for knowingly getting intoxicated to that degree or something. no way they leave an out for voluntary consumption of huge amounts of intoxicants as a defence to criminal charges fun story, s.33.1 was made a law in response to a guy drinking a 6 pack of beer and 40 oz of brandy, raping an elderly woman in a wheelchair while "blacked out", and then being acquitted because of his intoxication!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
terrorist ambulance posted:intox to the point of non insane automatism SHOULD be vanishingly rare, honestly my concern is just that judges will gently caress it up and turn it into "well, both of them were real drunk, so is it really sex assault?" (they already do that) Yeah involuntary action as a result of consuming alcohol is not just "drunk" it's "almost dead and spasming as life leaves your body." I'm all for it being a mitigating factor or preventing say, premeditation, but I don't have much of a problem with lapse of judgment where alcohol was a contributing factor being treated largely the same as guilty. SlyFrog posted:I've always wanted to make an argument that the military draft constitutes unlawful involuntary servitude under the Constitution. I've always been glad I don't have to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 22:39
|
|
|
SlyFrog posted:I've always wanted to make an argument that the military draft constitutes unlawful involuntary servitude under the Constitution. iirc scotus's reasoning for why conscription is not barred by the 13th amendment is extremely sus
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
Unamuno posted:iirc scotus's reasoning for why conscription is not barred by the 13th amendment is extremely sus Yeah, I just read the Selective Draft Law Cases decision quickly. Basically, a pretty tortured reading that consists of Constitution gives the government right to raise armies, it's always been done so it must be okay, lol fuckers. I mean, "Finally, as we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation, as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people, can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement." That's pretty hilariously terrible. I mean, you know there was no way they were going to say there couldn't be an involuntary draft, but still, that's almost insultingly bad reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 23:18
|
|
|
Nonexistence posted:Judges are the worst and I wish we had some check against them. Has any country explored that? One time someone told me that if the government really cared about justice they'd abolish the separation of powers and make judges directly accountable to politicians.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
Law is inherently conservative and reactionary and sucks generally. Welp,
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 00:22
|
|
|
SlyFrog posted:Yeah, I just read the Selective Draft Law Cases decision quickly. Basically, a pretty tortured reading that consists of Constitution gives the government right to raise armies, it's always been done so it must be okay, lol fuckers. I mean, it's not like a constitutional amendment allowing it wouldn't pass in record time, so they could have actually done the right thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 00:29
|
|
|
It wouldn't have even been that hard to actually ground the logic though. Considering the Civil War was won by a conscripted army, legislative intent as to what was meant by "involuntary servitude" gives you a drat easy out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 00:47
|
|
|
Unamuno posted:iirc scotus's reasoning for why conscription is not barred by the 13th amendment is extremely sus next time I get jury duty I’m pleading the 13th
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 00:47
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:next time I get jury duty I’m pleading the 13th Look, if the 13th wasn't written for the FYGM crowd, who else could have afforded the lobbyists?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
SlyFrog posted:Yeah, I just read the Selective Draft Law Cases decision quickly. Basically, a pretty tortured reading that consists of Constitution gives the government right to raise armies, it's always been done so it must be okay, lol fuckers. Is there any case that uses a phrase like "supreme and noble duty" that isn't horse crap.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 02:27
|
|
|
SlyFrog posted:Yeah, I just read the Selective Draft Law Cases decision quickly. Basically, a pretty tortured reading that consists of Constitution gives the government right to raise armies, it's always been done so it must be okay, lol fuckers. Cool tautology judge
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 03:26
|
|
|
What, you veer into my specialty field and you don't write, you don't call? No batsignal? Yeah, this is cool and an acknowledgment of one of the central problems of high degrees of intoxication. If we care about things such as criminal intent (which we should) then the problem of the mental state during severe intoxication has to be addressed somehow. Now, the canadians aren't the only ones to notice this poo poo. Ze germans have developed an entire legal framework around this once they realized that the criminal intent component was a problem. Their general solution is terrorist ambulance posted:a new general intent offence for knowingly getting intoxicated to that degree or something. Yeah. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actio_libera_in_causa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vollrausch Which is a weird statute. It basically sets a "cap" on sentencing as I suppose a compensation for it not being really super duper okay to convict a person without the capability to hold criminal intent? I don't understand the reasoning behind it, but if it's anything like ours, it's probably "because we said so". You see terrorist ambulance posted:. no way they leave an out for voluntary consumption of huge amounts of intoxicants as a defence to criminal charges This is kinda sorta what Norway did in the older criminal code (before 2005, new one implemented 2018). While there was a general principle at work for "assuming" adequate intent for general criminal acts, it was decided that this couldn't logically and sensibly apply to special intent, such as intent to make financial gain (a core component of the theft, embezzlement, fraud statutes) or premeditation. It was (an possibly is still today, but that's a whole debate) not supposed to be possible to convict someone in Norway for theft if they are roaring drunk. But why does this only apply to special intent and not general criminal intent? There's no real logical barrier between the reasoning for special intent that doesn't also apply to general criminal intent because quite frankly, having a mental state that makes special intent impossible sort of implies that general criminal intent is similarly impossible or at the very least the principle of doubt should come into play at that point anyway. I mean, I know why that isn't the case because no loving way can the legislature nor the police live with something like that, but it just pisses me off that the general reasoning for why and how to make the distinction amounts to  Yeah, believe me, I've looked, the reasoning is basically not there and it somehow magically is never problematized in the higher courts.In conclusion, getting drunk and sexually assaulting the statue down at the fish market is a land of contrasts
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 07:57
|
|
|
All I'm seeing is strong policy reasons to decrease the accepted role of intoxication in culture.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 08:50
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:All I'm seeing is strong policy reasons to decrease the accepted role of intoxication in culture. I'll drink to that! Skål!
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 10:46
|
|
|
Did someone say Skoal?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:In conclusion, getting drunk and sexually assaulting the statue down at the fish market is a land of contrasts 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2020 20:16
|
|
|
Lol at Twitter just now learning what Qualified Immunity is
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2020 02:10
|
|
|
you fucks have been awfully quiet lately - did everyone eat a proby in DND and I don't know about it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:56
|
|
|
I wrote a bunch of bond motions with my old colleagues at the PD's office who got overwhelmed. 
Toona the Cat fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:you fucks have been awfully quiet lately - did everyone eat a proby in DND and I don't know about it? the world has been busy enough that i have not lacked for distractions
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 17:27
|
|
|
Hey I just wanted to drop in this thread and say, thanks for talking me out of law school. I stayed at my cushy but boring AF job instead. I would have graduated this year had I ended up applying and been accepted (had already taken the LSAT when I inquired 3 years ago), and JFC what a bullet I dodged here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:42
|
|
|
BitesizedNike posted:Hey I just wanted to drop in this thread and say, thanks for talking me out of law school. I stayed at my cushy but boring AF job instead. I would have graduated this year had I ended up applying and been accepted (had already taken the LSAT when I inquired 3 years ago), and JFC what a bullet I dodged here. Truly the uplifting story we need in these trying times. Congratulations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 18:56
|
|
|
BitesizedNike posted:Hey I just wanted to drop in this thread and say, thanks for talking me out of law school. I stayed at my cushy but boring AF job instead. I would have graduated this year had I ended up applying and been accepted (had already taken the LSAT when I inquired 3 years ago), and JFC what a bullet I dodged here. new OP plz phil
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 19:15
|
|
|
And we complain about how few success stories there are in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 19:39
|
|
|
BitesizedNike posted:Hey I just wanted to drop in this thread and say, thanks for talking me out of law school. I stayed at my cushy but boring AF job instead. I would have graduated this year had I ended up applying and been accepted (had already taken the LSAT when I inquired 3 years ago), and JFC what a bullet I dodged here. God bless  We shifted out of WFH and not having my work at home has been amazing. Too bad the loving world is burning down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 22:12
|
|
|
Police here arrested 40 peaceful protestors and the DA is just like “nah” and dropping charges against all of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
I'm studying for the bar and loving life!
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 23:43
|
|
|
Toona the Cat posted:Police here arrested 40 peaceful protestors and the DA is just like “nah” and dropping charges against all of them. Good
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 23:59
|
|
|
Toona the Cat posted:Police here arrested 40 peaceful protestors and the DA is just like “nah” and dropping charges against all of them. Local protest here only resulted in like two arrests with the cops giving a very wide berth. However, those few arrests basically intentionally tried to get arrested to try and get the crowd fighting the cops for them. One of the arrested dudes was on probation for felony robbery.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 00:06
|
|
|
Cops here tried to copy paste probable cause statements on the arrests. Judges here noped that out of court too. Hear New York is really lovely though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 03:06
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Local protest here only resulted in like two arrests with the cops giving a very wide berth. However, those few arrests basically intentionally tried to get arrested to try and get the crowd fighting the cops for them. One of the arrested dudes was on probation for felony robbery. Here in the capitol anyone who has been arrested protesting was threatened with a felony charge the second time as of last Wednesday
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:04 |
|
|
Hoshi posted:Here in the capitol anyone who has been arrested protesting was threatened with a felony charge the second time as of last Wednesday What’s the charge?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 03:14
|
|
