Property Owners Get Dunked On
Another victory for the powerful over property rights.
Editorial - November 28th, 2009 - Wall Street Journal
New York judges served up what basketball fans call a facial on Tuesday, when an appellate court ruled that the state may seize homes and small businesses in Brooklyn for the benefit of a private developer and the New Jersey Nets. The decision represents a backward step for the effort to protect property rights at the state level since the Supreme Court's 2005 decision in Kelo v. New London.There is of course no expectation they will defend citizen rights by the tyranny dominated totalitarian scum who hold positions of power as federal judges. Both left wing activist judges and right wing conrservative judges intentionally allow these judicial abuses to continue. The reason is simple. The power of the judiciary is enhanced by its ability to involve itself with these cases. Judges care nothing about the law. They only care about power and taking property is all about power. The rule of law has become the rule of judges... and the judges like it that way.
The case, Goldstein v. New York State Urban Development Corporation, dealt with plans by developer Forest City Ratner to build a new arena for the Nets as well as snazzy apartments and offices on land currently occupied by homes and businesses. To make way for the sports complex, the state declared the property "blighted" and used its power of eminent domain to hand it to the developer.
Such unabashed takings have an unfortunate history in New York state, where the political class has a habit of using its powers on behalf of well-connected private interests. Caught under the wheels are average citizens whose only recourse is to try to defend their property rights in court.
There is no justice in America. The courts are corrupt.
The KSM Show Trial
by J.R. Dunn - November 24th, 2009 - American Thinker
AG Eric Holder's statement that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed will remain in custody no matter what the verdict in his upcoming Manhattan trial, coupled with Obama's instructions to the jury that KSM be "convicted and executed", reveals the entire exercise as a show trial, a ritual effort intended not to achieve justice, but to make a public political point. The question is, what could that point possibly be?What is the point? It is of course to humiliate America, our previous President, George W. Bush and the Republican Party. It is most assuredly not to prove what a great justice system we have. Our justice system is a joke, proven by the fact that this trial will take place.
Woman Hit By Train While Taking Photos On Tupelo Tracks Seeks Millions From Railroad
by Stafff - November 17th, 2009 - Associated Press
Helen Gable was taking pictures on the railroad tracks in Tupelo in 2006 when a train cut her leg nearly off as she tried to get out of the way.Then why did a huge vehicle that cannot turn even an inch nearly cut her leg off?
"Helen Gable, while taking pictures of her niece's daughter, was exercising due care" while standing on the tracks, the lawsuit said.
Why does our Supreme Court still tolerate such stupid law suits? Do they want to look like imbeciles... or are they so focused on the trivia of their job they cannot stand back and see how utterly stupid it is for this lady to blame the train for her incompetence. There is no way to claim she was both standing on the tracks and exercising due care. The two facts are mutually incompatible.
California Killer's Case
Back Before Supreme Court
by David G. Savage - November 1st, 2009 - Los Angeles Times
Reporting from Washington - The U.S. Supreme Court is considering, for the third time, the case of a California murderer who was sentenced to die in 1982 for the brutal killing of a young woman.The reason is because the 9th Circuit is a leader in the rule of judges sweepstakes. 9th Circuit judges are arrogantly indifferent to law and the premise that judges enforce the rule of law. They are instead dedicated to the idea that our Constitution is an outdated document. Judges get to make it up as they go.
Twenty years ago, the California Supreme Court affirmed a death sentence for Fernando Belmontes, but since then his case has bounced back and forth in the federal courts. Three times in this decade, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned his death sentence as flawed.
The case is the latest skirmish in the long-running war between California prosecutors and the 9th Circuit over the death penalty -- and it helps explains the oddity of capital punishment in California. Although death sentences are common, executions are rare.
Don't like the idea of the death penalty. Fine. You simply block all executions and make the courts a permanent farce. The people are too stupid to do anything about it. Judges consider themselves above the law, not a part of it.