rockaction
Footballguy
“Isn’t it just too late in the day to argue that any of the Bill of Rights is not incorporated?," said Kavanugh.
Last edited by a moderator:
I assume he's referring to this, from yesterday.I think you're gonna need to spell this out a little more GB.
Sorry, man. Exactly. I'm not spelling it out very well. But Kavanaugh basically said incorporation was a settled battle, which hasn't been the case in the past.I assume he's referring to this, from yesterday.
Yes, but we do not call it stealing, we call it removing the instrumentality of a crime, or in some cases the proceeds of crime. See, with the name change we pretend that the rose by any other name does not smell at all.Yeah, this is the case about states outright stealing from people. I can't believe this hasn't been litigated before.
I take your point, just wanted to post that a significant event had happened at the Supreme Court,Yes, but we do not call it stealing, we call it removing the instrumentality of a crime, or in some cases the proceeds of crime. See, with the name change we pretend that the rose by any other name does not smell at all.
I think that many states and local jurisdictions have lost any sense of proportionality when it comes to asset forfeiture as they cannot see beyond their own bottom lines. I would hope that some rationality could be imposed by State Supreme Courts and by State legislatures. Thus far that has been slow coming. We have invited the Supremes to look at this and I do think they are correct that incorporation has more or less happened and become a settle concept that now only needs more comprehensive application.I take your point, just wanted to post that a significant event had happened at the Supreme Court,
I disagree with asset forfeiture. YMMV.
Yeah, incorporation is the standard. It would be nice if all the Amendments were, IMHO. I agree with you on that front.I think that many states and local jurisdictions have lost any sense of proportionality when it comes to asset forfeiture as they cannot see beyond their own bottom lines. I would hope that some rationality could be imposed by State Supreme Courts and by State legislatures. Thus far that has been slow coming. We have invited the Supremes to look at this and I do think they are correct that incorporation has more or less happened and become a settle concept that now only needs more comprehensive application.
If you're not a drunk, you're no good in my book.The other #### I can leave behind.The foregoing having been said I am going to be a contrarian here and oppose anything Justice drunken lying sexual assaulter has to say. I would rather be wrong than be aligned with him.
I saw this, Gorsuch also hammered on this IIRC.“Isn’t it just too late in the day to argue that any of the Bill of Rights is not incorporated?," said Kavanugh.
I love drunks, just not sloppy out of control boorish drunks who become assaultive.If you're not a drunk, you're no good in my book.The other #### I can leave behind.
Yep. No good.I love drunks, just not sloppy out of control boorish drunks who become assaultive.
Drunken was the only thing of the bunch which has been established.If you're not a drunk, you're no good in my book.The other #### I can leave behind.
To your satisfaction.Drunken was the only thing of the bunch which has been established.
So you don't like beer?The foregoing having been said I am going to be a contrarian here and oppose anything Justice drunken lying sexual assaulter has to say. I would rather be wrong than be aligned with him.
No, I do. I am going to oppose anything he has to say, so I believe that he does not like beer.So you don't like beer?
I believe he was simply stating a euphemism, and he actually performs acts of intimate congress with hops and barley.No, I do. I am going to oppose anything he has to say, so I believe that he does not like beer.
Well I oppose that as it would tend to ruin them for the Wort.I believe he was simply stating a euphemism, and he actually performs acts of intimate congress with hops and barley.
I'm pretty sure he likes beer. I'm pretty sure he likes it a whole lot. I wouldn't be surprised if he liked rubbing alcohol as much as Kitty Dukakis.No, I do. I am going to oppose anything he has to say, so I believe that he does not like beer.
For some reason I want to look up Kitty Dukakis in Urban dictionary because if it doesn't have a definition, it should.I'm pretty sure he likes beer. I'm pretty sure he likes it a whole lot. I wouldn't be surprised if he liked rubbing alcohol as much as Kitty Dukakis.
Oh, I don't think he likes Kitty Dukakis very much.I'm pretty sure he likes beer. I'm pretty sure he likes it a whole lot. I wouldn't be surprised if he liked rubbing alcohol as much as Kitty Dukakis.
I think that's definitely something Dentist pays extra for.For some reason I want to look up Kitty Dukakis in Urban dictionary because if it doesn't have a definition, it should.
It's very effective for a small group of people. Ketamine therapy is, too. Also psilocybin.Good lord. I had no idea that she turned to electroshock therapy and is touting its effectiveness.
It really is an echo chamber.Blah blah blah. Yet another thread about incorporation as it applies to state civil forfeiture proceedings that transitions into a discussion of Kitty Dukakis drinking rubbing alcohol and promoting electroshock therapy. Haven't we already had enough of these?
@FBG Moderator, please consider creating a "Incorporation of the Eighth Amendment's Prohibition on Excessive Fines/Kitty Dukakis' Struggles With Depression" sub-forum. TIA.It really is an echo chamber.
Are you sure you're a prosecutor?I think that many states and local jurisdictions have lost any sense of proportionality when it comes to asset forfeiture as they cannot see beyond their own bottom lines. I would hope that some rationality could be imposed by State Supreme Courts and by State legislatures. Thus far that has been slow coming. We have invited the Supremes to look at this and I do think they are correct that incorporation has more or less happened and become a settle concept that now only needs more comprehensive application.
When I took the oath to protect and defend the Constitution I took that to mean the spirit and the letter of the law. Within those bounds I prosecute, or I did, as zealously as anybody and more than most, but within those bounds. Now, for the past two years, I only prosecute when called upon as a consultant or as conflict counsel.Are you sure you're a prosecutor?
We need prosecutors as well as we need defenders. Both have a part in our system.When I took the oath to protect and defend the Constitution I took that to mean the spirit and the letter of the law. Within that bounds I prosecute, or I did, as zealously as anybody and more than most, but within those bounds.
The sillier the cybin the better.It's very effective for a small group of people. Ketamine therapy is, too. Also psilocybin.
That's what I keep telling my wife.The sillier the cybin the better.
That's no way to refer to your wife.That's what I keep telling my wife.
Then someone always tells me to stop arguing with the coat rack.
I asked that hyperbolic question in jest given that the majority of prosecutors I know would not favor law which diminished their ability to forfeit defendants' property.When I took the oath to protect and defend the Constitution I took that to mean the spirit and the letter of the law. Within those bounds I prosecute, or I did, as zealously as anybody and more than most, but within those bounds. Now, for the past two years, I only prosecute when called upon as a consultant or as conflict counsel.
The later two probably more effective for a wider group than the former.It's very effective for a small group of people. Ketamine therapy is, too. Also psilocybin.
I suppose Kennedy is gone, but never underestimate the Court's ability to say that the Excessive Fines clause is incorporated and could be triggered by civil asset forfeiture in some instances without telling you how to know when those instances are. I suppose if Kavanaugh keeps me from having to read another Kennedy decision where I don't know what the freaking rule of decision is, then I can at least forgive him that bar fight with Chris Dudley and the dude who looked like the lead singer of UB40.This has been one of the federal government's great tools to get states to fight the war on drugs. Take away this ability and states lose one of their great weapons to fund their war on drugs.
For that reason alone I am okay with a ruling that would end this.
I understand, sadly.Zow said:I asked that hyperbolic question in jest given that the majority of prosecutors I know would not favor law which diminished their ability to forfeit defendants' property.
I don't disagree with your point, my only thought might be is that if it is not so clearly a state's right to seize any asset they choose the gamble to put forth all state's resources into fighting "crime" that is largely dependent on this seizure ability could be reduced. (and I am okay with that)Ramsay Hunt Experience said:I suppose Kennedy is gone, but never underestimate the Court's ability to say that the Excessive Fines clause is incorporated and could be triggered by civil asset forfeiture in some instances without telling you how to know when those instances are. I suppose if Kavanaugh keeps me from having to read another Kennedy decision where I don't know what the freaking rule of decision is, then I can at least forgive him that bar fight with Chris Dudley and the dude who looked like the lead singer of UB40.This has been one of the federal government's great tools to get states to fight the war on drugs. Take away this ability and states lose one of their great weapons to fund their war on drugs.
For that reason alone I am okay with a ruling that would end this.
MDMA is also on that list.It's very effective for a small group of people. Ketamine therapy is, too. Also psilocybin.
IIRC, the Amendments were only supposed to apply to the Federal government, not the States. Incorporation is a twentieth century practice of taking select Amendments and applying them to the states.MDMA is also on that list.
On the main subject, this has been something that has needed definition for a long time (much like eminent domain). Way, way too much potential for abuse. I need a remedial education on "incorporation" inside the world of legalese, though.