Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Tag Archives: Elena Kagan

Joliet, Illinois is About to Write a Very Large Check to Elijah Manuel

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Friday, March 31, 2017:

Interstate 80 bridge over the Des Plaines Rive...

Interstate 80 bridge over the Des Plaines River near Joliet, Illinois.

Joliet is a pleasant township of about 150,000 souls located on the Des Plaines River 40 miles southwest of Chicago. It describes itself as going through “a modern day renaissance” after having a near-death financial experience. Then-Mayor Tom Giarrante said three years ago this month:

I am proud to once again report that the State of the City continues to be … stable. As mayor, I will continue to work hard to keep Joliet financially sound by controlling our spending. It won’t be easy, and it won’t always be popular, but I will work to keep our checkbook balanced and we will not balance it by raising property taxes.

Three years earlier, the town had a $17 million deficit. It’s about to have another similar experience.

The Supreme Court last week paved the way. In Manuel v. City of Joliet, the court ruled unanimously that Elijah Manuel was free to bring a claim against the city based on Fourth Amendment violations conducted by Joliet police officers back in 2011. The opinion, written by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, gave Manuel the go-ahead:

Keep Reading…

Supreme Court Unanimously Upholds Fourth Amendment in Illinois case

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, March 30, 2017:

English: Elena Kagan, Associate Justice of the...

Elena Kagan, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States

The city of Joliet, Illinois, is about to find out just how costly its miscarriage of justice can be, now that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously last week that it cannot incarcerate an individual while he is awaiting trial, absent probable cause. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan was succinct in delivering the court’s opinion:

Keep Reading…

GOP Platform: Repeal the “Johnson Amendment” Inhibiting Pastors’ Free Speech

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, July 25, 2016:  

English: North Church steeple in Portsmouth, N...

The week before he was to give his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland last Thursday, Donald Trump phoned the president of Liberty University to tell him that the GOP’s platform called for repeal of the “Johnson Amendment.” Said Jerry Falwell, Jr.:

Keep Reading…

Three Liberal Justices Dissent in Supreme Court Fourth Amendment Ruling

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, June 22, 2016: 

English: The United States Supreme Court, the ...

The United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the United States, in 2010.

Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented inUtah v. Strieff, a decision that was announced by the court on Monday. On the surface the decision appeared to allow an unconstitutional expansion of police powers.

In a case dating back to 2006, a narcotics detective in Salt Lake City was watching a suspected drug house. He noticed a man leaving the house and the detective stopped him, demanding to know what he was doing in the house. In the process he demanded his identification, which he forwarded to his dispatcher to run through the police database. When he learned that the man had an outstanding warrant for a traffic violation, the detective, Douglas Fackrell, arrested Edward Strieff, searched him, and found various drug-related paraphernalia.

Strieff moved to suppress the damning evidence, claiming

Keep Reading…

Why Are Liberals Jumping on the Teacher Tenure Reform Bandwagon?

This article was first published at the McAlvany Intelligence Advisors on Friday, June 27, 2014:

English: A bandwagon in the 2009 Great Circus ...

A bandwagon in the 2009 Great Circus Parade, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

It didn’t take long for the decision in California that threw out union rules protecting teachers to galvanize similar efforts in New York. The Partnership for Educational Justice announced its plans to file a similar lawsuit against the same kind of rules extant in New York that so outraged Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu earlier this month when he ruled them unconstitutional.

The Partnership will sue next month to get rid of the same three rules that upset Treu:

Keep Reading…

Lawsuit to be Filed Against Teacher Tenure rules in New York

This article was first published at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, June 26, 2014: 

 

Classroom in the Afternoon

Classroom in the Afternoon

Following the widely hailed victory over California’s egregious teacher tenure rules in court earlier this month, another group is bringing suit in New York to challenge similar rules. Called the Partnership for Educational Justice, it has enlisted pro bono efforts from Jay Lefkowitz, a skilled and capable litigator with previous victories against teacher unions under his belt.

The lawsuit will challenge laws that Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu ruled to be unconstitutional in California, namely,

Keep Reading…

Latest Supreme Court Decision Already Impacting Prayers in Public Places

East Carolina University

East Carolina University (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This article first appeared at The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, May 7, 2014:

On Thursday, May 1, an associate chemistry professor sent out his guidelines to his chemistry majors to use during their speeches upon graduation: 35 words max, and no mention of God. Here’s this from his email sent to his students at East Carolina University:

Keep Reading…

Obama’s Second Term and the Second Amendment

Statuesque Obama

Obama (Photo credit: jurvetson)

I’m taking literary license here, writing this on Election Day, so I don’t know if the Annointed One will capture a second term. But this from Katie Pavlich is a good reminder, regardless of who is president. Pavlich, as you may remember, wrote a devastating expose, Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and Shameless Cover-Up, about which I did a review.

Here, she posits his reelection, and reminds us of Obama’s promise:

During the second presidential debate of 2012, President Barack Obama said, “What I’m trying to do is get a broader conversation about how we reduce the violence generally. Part of it, is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced.”

Obama is strongly opposed to concealed carry, has supported gun owner licensing and gun registration and voted to ban semi-automatic rifles, handguns and ammunition during his time in the Illinois State Senate. He even voted for the criminal prosecution of those who use a firearm in self-defense. (my emphasis)

She reminds us of the potential for mischief during

Keep Reading…

Keep Your Eye on Elena Kagan

English: Then-Harvard Law School dean Elena Kagan

Then-Harvard Law School dean Elena Kagan (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The case now before the Supreme Court, Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, is a test of the “first sale doctrine,” also known as the “right of first sale,” the “first sale rule,” or the “exhaustion rule.”

Here’s the problem: such a doctrine creates an exception to a copyright holder’s right to distribute his product. Once he has made the “first sale” his interest in that product is “exhausted.” The new owner of the product can do with it as he wishes.

The story is interesting. But keep in mind that I want to talk about Elena Kagan and her likely decision on the matter, as it appears that she will have the deciding vote:

The case revolves around Thailand native Supap Kirtsaeng, who moved to  the  U.S. for college and found that it was cheaper to buy textbooks back  home than  here. So he plotted to have his family buy the less expensive  textbooks and  ship them to the U.S., where he made about $900,000 on  eBay, undercutting the  publisher’s prices.

The Supreme Court will now review the case, after a lower court ordered  him  to pay John Wiley & Sons $600,000 for the scheme.

The outcome could be devastating: Whether it be online retailers like eBay and  Craigslist, thrift shops  like Goodwill and Salvation Army, or regular people  who want to hold a  garage sale, item owners would be required to get the  manufacturer’s  permission before reselling the products they own, and the   manufacturer could potentially charge a portion of the resale.

And so what do we know about Kagan aside from the fact that Obama nominated her to the court back in May of 2010? Well, we know a lot. We know, thanks to the work of Trevor Loudon, a lot more than

Keep Reading…

A Reminder of How Tenuous the Second Amendment Is

John Paul Stevens, U.S. Supreme Court justice.

John Paul Stevens, U.S. Supreme Court justice. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens spoke on Monday in Washington at a luncheon hosted by the virulently anti-gun group, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and reminded us of just how tenuous the hold the Supremes have on our precious Second Amendment rights.

Stevens wrote dissents to both of the Court’s recent decisions supporting those rights, and noted that even Justice Scalia in his assent to those decisions, Scalia “left the door open to regulations regarding who can carry guns and where, and what kinds of guns are lawful.”

Stevens added: “The fact that Congress doesn’t address [gun violence], I find mind-boggling, to tell you the truth.”

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of

Keep Reading…

White House Shifts Legal Gears as ObamaCare Heads to Supreme Court

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe ...

The pressure of the continuing countdown to Monday, March 26, when the Supreme Court takes on the challenge to ObamaCare, has forced legal advisors to the White House to change their strategy in hopes of successfully rebuffing it and preserving the Obama administration’s key legislative victory signed into law in March, 2010.

It’s all about the mandate and whether it can be sustained by claiming justification for it under a generous reading of the Commerce Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3) in the Constitution. Without that mandate, the administration claims that the rest of the law would necessarily fail due to its excessive costs. The Congressional Budget Office just reported that those costs would be double what the Obama administration touted in its cram-down of the law two years ago. And another CBO study said that, if implemented, millions of citizens—between 3 million and 20 million—would actually lose their present coverage, while public polls continue to show declining support for the whole idea of the federal government’s virtual takeover of the country’s health delivery system.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll taken in January showed that most of those polled think that ObamaCare, if implemented, will cost jobs, hurt the economy, and cost more than projected. Last week’s poll from the same source showed that two-thirds of those polled “say the U.S. Supreme Court should throw out either the individual mandate…or the law in its entirety.” According to the pollsters, “[T]he law has never earned majority support in ABC/Post polls—and this update…finds a strong sense its critics are dominating the debate. Seventy percent of Americans report hearing mainly negative things about the law…”

Another measure of the intensity surrounding the pending Supreme Court hearings (a record six hours are scheduled over three days next week) is the number of “amicus” or “friend of the court” briefs that have been submitted by parties who are interested in influencing the outcome of a lawsuit but who are not parties to it. Reuters reported that 136 briefs have been filed with the court (a stack about two feet high), a third more than

Keep Reading…

Obama’s Anti-Gun Agenda Remains Alive and Well

Barack Obama

Barack Obama (Photo credit: jamesomalley)

On March 30 of last year, President Obama dropped in to greet Sarah Brady, who was meeting with White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. Sarah is the wife of Jim Brady, the former White House Press Secretary under Reagan, who was shot but not killed in an assassination attempt on President Reagan in 1981. The Bradys subsequently became strong supporters of gun control. According to Brady, the President brought up the issue of gun control “to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda. [The President said,] ‘I just want you to know that we are working on [additional limits on gun ownership]. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar.'”

Thanks to the efforts of freedom advocates such as John Lott, Obama’s efforts to stay under the radar are now glistening in the sunlight. Lott reviewed an unsettling and lengthy list of Obama’s “processes,” starting with the President’s intention to ignore at least 20 parts of the 2012 omnibus spending bill that he signed into law last week. Using the controversial and likely unconstitutional “signing statements,” Obama said, “I have advised Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility…such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient.” Buried in the 1,200-page bill was a restriction that bars health officials from using taxpayer funds to lobby for gun control. To rub it in, Obama iterated his position: “Our spending decisions shall not be treated as dependent on the approval of congressional committees.” In plain English, the President just told Congress to go jump—he was going to do what he wanted to do, regardless.

Lott noted that Obama’s Interior Department just issued new administrative rules that threatened the use of public lands for recreational shooting. The language of the new regulations reads in part: 

Keep Reading…

Supreme Court: Corporations Are Persons without Personal Privacy

The current United States Supreme Court, the h...

Image via Wikipedia

When the Supreme Court was given the opportunity to extend the realm of privacy for corporations, it failed, 8-0. The case of FCC v. AT&T, which began nearly seven years ago, concerned a malfeasance by AT&T and schools in New London, Connecticut, and was resolved, briefly, by the payment of a fine to the FCC.

In 2005, however, CompTel, a trade association made up of some of AT&T’s competitors, petitioned the FCC under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to release the information they had gathered in the course of the investigation. The obvious purpose was to

Keep Reading…

Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and the 4th Amendment

Stylized arrest.

Image via Wikipedia

When the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments on a Fourth Amendment case decided by the Kentucky Supreme Court (Kentucky v. King), alarm bells went off. Under the Fourth Amendment, as readers are no doubt aware, “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

But what if police pick the wrong house, pound on the door loudly, announce that “This is the police!” and then, smelling pot, break down the door without a warrant and arrest the homeowner for violating local drug laws?

Keep Reading…

Despite Kagan, Public Knows Little About Supreme Court

Cover of "The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Sup...

Cover via Amazon

Now that Elena Kagan has been confirmed as Justice of the Supreme Court following several weeks of highly publicized hearings, the public remains poorly informed about the Court’s role. And even what is supposedly known is contradictory. Pew Research Center’s latest New IQ Quiz, which was conducted in early July, revealed that “an overwhelming proportion of Americans are familiar with Twitter…yet the public continues to struggle in identifying political figures, foreign leaders and even knowing facts about key government policies.”

For example, barely one in four of those surveyed was able to identify John Roberts as the chief justice of the Supreme Court. Pew goes on to say, “young people fare particularly poorly on political knowledge.”

Keep Reading…

Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan: Clearly Opaque

days Elena Kagan since 2010

Image via Wikipedia

When President Obama named Elena Kagan as his nominee for justice of the Supreme Court to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens, he said she “embodies that same excellence, independence, integrity and passion for the law” as did Justice Stevens. Obama said Kagan is “one of the foremost legal minds” in the country, and is “a trailblazing leader.”

As was immediately pointed out by Conservative Action, the words “independence” and “trail-blazing leader” translate into “Liberal Judicial Activist.”  Conservative Action then went on to offer rebuttals to various “talking points” the administration is using to promote her nomination:

Keep Reading…

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2018 Bob Adelmann