Comments on: Supreme Court Firms Up State Immunity From Wrongful Conviction Lawsuits

By: An Active Newt » Right Thinking

An Active Newt » Right Thinking — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:04:31 +0000

[...] can be searched without a warrant based on the smell of marijuana; that prosecutors can not be sued for burying exculpatory evidence; that the sound of a toilet flushing justifies a search. They have [...]

By: This is why I’m starting to oppose the death penalty » Gator In The Desert

Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:15:23 +0000

[...] Supreme Court Firms Up State Immunity From Wrongful Conviction Lawsuits | The Agitator Share this:EmailFacebook [...]

By: Don’t Confuse Us With Facts « The Honest Courtesan

Don’t Confuse Us With Facts « The Honest Courtesan — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 15:53:47 +0000

[...] or executed. Furthermore, the United States Supreme Court recently ruled (in a case involving former New Orleans district attorney Harry Connick) that even if a prosecutor maliciously hides exculpatory evidence, and even if this monstrous act [...]

By: Art

Art — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 02:29:26 +0000

This ruling is a tragedy.

The state legislature ought to remedy this.

The lawyers who sat on that evidence ought to be disbarred.

Another bad decision from the same court which gave us the Dred Scott decision and Roe vs. Wade.

By: Debi

Debi — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 19:08:08 +0000

And of course that is not the way to take care of this problem hopefully this is not what it comes down to, I pray anyway.

By: Debi

Debi — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 19:06:46 +0000

As I said for many years now people will begin to take the law into their own hands and get instant justice

By: Dana

Dana — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:12:12 +0000

Well this is great the next step to everybody living in what’s known as a police state society. So God help anybody that happens to make anybody in law enforcement mad at them. They now have free reign to make your life a living hell and there is nothing you can do about it. Just like was mentioned with the guy in this story he was almost executed for a crime he didn’t even commit. Most people won’t care because it wasn’t happening to them but what will they say when next time it is your turn. How are they going to feel when they are the one that is on death row or had 15 years of their life stolen because they made the wrong person mad.

By: Toastrider

Toastrider — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 02:51:00 +0000

“The only proper government is anarchy, also known as individual sovereignty.”

Ideally, yes.

Realistically, there are people out there that I don’t trust with a plastic shovel, a bucket, and a pile of sand to play in.

By: Garry

Garry — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 00:00:17 +0000

I forget, what box comes after the jury box?

By: Joe

Joe — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 17:19:52 +0000

I can’t even start to say how much that sucks.

By: Leonson

Leonson — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:30:43 +0000

Meh, this was an end-run around the prosecutor immunity bit anyhow.

The law/decision that was wrong was the individual prosecutor immunity. This decision actually makes sense as far as I’m concerned.

By: supercat

supercat — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 23:16:26 +0000

//I’d suggest that we need a constitutional amendment making clear that absolute immunity doesn’t exist and laying out the boundaries of qualified immunity, but that seems so unlikely to happen that wishing it would happen would be just as effective as asking our “representatives” to make it happen.//

If the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, then no member of government has authority to violate it. Any statute which would appear to grant government agents the authority to violate the Constitution with impunity would be illegitimate, in at least those aspects.

By: CyniCAl

CyniCAl — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:04:44 +0000

“The People have not had a proper government ever.”

100% agreed, fwb. The only proper government is anarchy, also known as individual sovereignty.

By: CyniCAl

CyniCAl — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:02:52 +0000

Thanks Maggie, I stand corrected.

By: Z

Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:52:38 +0000

Here’s a case the supremes won’t take up. Border searches that take days and take place nearly 200 miles from the border? No problem!

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/03/30/09-10139.pdf

By: sigh

sigh — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:42:37 +0000

“I am not going to suggest what Thompson should do, since I don’t want to banned from this site.”

Me neither. But I hope someone shows him how to weld and operate a bulldozer.

This ruling is disgusting. It’s like they’re not even trying anymore.

By: Eddie

Eddie — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:32:14 +0000

What troubles me about SCOTUS cases like this (and all 5-4 rulings) is how rarely 9 of the supposedly greatest legal minds in the US are unable to come a consensus when intepreting a law.

I mean, basically a coin flip is deciding so many important cases. You’d think these people would agree on things more often!

By: Z

Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:16:54 +0000

*was accepted.

By: Z

Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:16:31 +0000

Oh yeah the Supremes took up the Wal Mart class action case from the 9th Circuit. Whatever its merits, I will make the same prediction here that I did when the Thompson case was accept. The employees will lose. Probably by 5-4. Probably the same 5 as here.

By: Z

Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:12:16 +0000

Radley

Can you name 3 decisions from those 5 justices which enhanced individual rights in cases where doing so went against government interests and did not involve either guns or the economic wishes of the economically powerful? (i.e. Citizens Union doesn’t count.) Kelo is one.

The Raich majority included both Kennedy and Scalia by the way.