This entry was posted
on Wednesday, January 19th, 2011 at 2:30 pm by Radley Balko
and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
“This court system is a farce,” he said after Tuesday’s hearing, as reported by the Tribune. “This court wants a man to hand over his once-in-a-lifetime accomplishment to pay some damn attorney’s fees? I could see if it was going to pay something for my children or my ex-wife.”
There may be more relevant information omitted from the article, but as it is I see nothing inherently illibertarian (if that’s a word) about the judge’s ruling.
As I read it, here’s what probably happened:
1.) Ahanotu repeatedly failed to comply with the court’s orders or obstructed the divorce proceedings so the judge ordered the player to pay his ex-wife’s attorney’s fees. (This happened to a friend of mine where her husband made way more than she did and he clearly wanted to force her to rack up legal bills she couldn’t pay.)
2.) Despite having earned over $6 million over the course of his six-year NFL career, Ahanotu doesn’t have the money to pay the legal bills.
3.) To pay the outstanding bill, the judge ordered him to turn over the ring.
I guess to me the operative fact is whether he has alternate means to pay for the outstanding legal fees. If he does, then I agree that the judge has exceeded his authority. However, if he doesn’t then he got what he deserved.
@9, the phrase “libertarianism happens to people” refers to an authoritarian act that happens to someone which causes them to see the system for what it truly is and be upset about it. The hope is that that singular event is the strike of the match that lights the fire of liberty in that person’s heart and mind. It usually takes an event to happen to someone as opposed to having many lengthy discussions and ponderings of their views.
BamBam- I’m well aware of what the phrase means… I guess I just always reserved it for situations where the state action is unjust, and absent more information the judge’s act doesn’t seem any more authoritarian than any other state act (and if you’re an anarchist and that’s your point, well that’s fine, but I hope you’re not going to post every article in which the state acts in the Agitator’s comments).
My russian friend said the translations are accurate. He was surprised that someone had scans that are high quality because these posters were from the 1970s and 1980s and were part of the propaganda machine and Soviet style totalitarian system. He said “the main power was in horrifying people with everything”. Sound familiar?