U.S. SUPREME COURT NEEDS REDOING

The U.S.Supreme Court came down with 2 important decisions yesterday re Trump’s tax returns. Both not good for him.

His returns and other financials will definitely become part of the Manhattan District Attorney’s case. The other case involves subpoenaed Trump tax returns by Congress. Probably will be enforceable. However not as certain as the Manhattan D.A.’s case.

The specifics of the cases not of concern here. The information is already well known via media announcements since yesterday morning.

A significant portion of my practice involved federal court cases. Especially the environmental ones.

The federal courts are overloaded. Too many cases. In every federal court I appeared. The scene always the same.

Part of trial work involves motions. Legal arguments. No clients, no jury. Only the judge and attorneys involved. A point of law to be resolved. Generally important to the case. A successful motion could mean immediate victory then and there.

Judges never broke for lunch. They continued to hear legal arguments through the lunch hour. Eating a sandwich and drinking a can of soda while so doing.

The federal courts then and now overloaded and not enough judges.

The paper work involved in trying a federal case is overwhelming. More for the attorneys involved, rather than the judges. Reams of required responses to relatively unimportant items. Required several days to prepare at the attorney end and time later by the judge’s clerk to review.

The system requires more judges. Problem is the politics of it all. Takes forever, sometimes years, for a nominee to be approved to any of the federal courts.

Ergo. federal cases take on a life of their own. The Manhattan D.A. one around 4 years so far. The Congressional one almost 2 years.

One of the first things taught in law school is Justice delayed is Justice denied. The present federal system has too much delay built into it. The Rules of Court must change.

The paper work must be cut back dramatically. Judges need 1-2 more law clerks each. The law clerks are former brilliant law students who research the law and often prepare rough drafts of the judge’s decision.

The entire system must be looked at and changes made. All to accelerate the process.

What galled me when I was practicing and galls me even to day when I am a retired observer is the wasted years before a decision is rendered. Legal cases sitting for several years to be reached resolve no one’s problems. The pain is now, the resolution should be now. Not 4-5 years hence.

My other concern involves the number of Supreme Court Justices. Every year there is clamor anew for an expansion of the Court. Not because of the time factor. Rather, politics.

Politics will never be fully removed from the process. It is the way it is.

In order to make it possible for Supreme Court cases to move faster, two things are required.

More clerks. For the reasons set forth hereinbefore.

Additionally, the Supreme Court rules themselves must be adjusted to meet the expediency of the times. The Manhattan D.A. decision favors the D.A. However, it must first go back to the trial court for review and application. More delay.

Whether Trump lied on his taxes and financials will not be public knowledge before the election. Not right. The people should know whether their President is a thief before they vote on him again.

My solution again two fold. Redo the court rules to accelerate the process and add 1-2 law clerks to each judge at each level to assist in moving cases faster.

Even a federal judge has the right to a leisurely lunch hour.

The other thing that bothers me is the excitement because Gorsuch and Kavanaugh voted with the Court’s liberal block in both cases.

Judges are human. The black robes do not make them any less people. They are driven by the same motivations and desires as any one else.

I suspect the two may have voted as they did to show the Nation they are not die hard far right Republicans who blindly support Trump. They are cleansing themselves.

See how many times they vote with the liberal block over the next year.

Can’t wait to read Trump’s niece’s book concerning Uncle Donald. Too Much and Never Enough.

She claims Trump paid someone to take the SAT exam for him. Would not surprise me. This past year has seen several parents arrested who arranged the same for their children. I am familiar with a former judge who had a friend take his LSAT exam for admittance to law school so he would be sure to pass and get in.

Trump continues to threaten to cut school funding if schools do not reopen. A tyrannical way to govern. My way or the highway.

Trump has screwed up how the country should be dealing with coronavirus. Look at the numbers! Now he wants to set our children up to die. Merely to get parents back to work. The economy, economy, economy!

Some additional comments I have come across in response to Trump’s cry to reopen the schools.

“I feel fine. I paid somebody to take my coronavirus test.”

“Mr. President, you are a complete buffoon.”

“Who is he going to blame when the kids start getting sick?”

“There is no way that I am going to sacrifice my precious kids to the deadly pandemic! Never!!!”

“He allowed the enemy to murder our men and women who give their lives for our country. You really believe the narcissist psychopath cares about our little ones?”

“The poster child for the face of evil. He’s a bully, full of fear.”

Beginning today, this blog will also appear every day in KONK Life E-Blast.

I am excited.

The picture KONK publisher Guy de Boer picked out of his photo morgue is of me some years ago in Greece. I am on Amorgos and sitting under a overhang at my favorite Amorgos restaurant. I went over late morning each day to do my blog. Ate lunch while there. Spent several hours writing and taking in the scenery.

The restaurant was nothing fancy. Nothing on Amorgos was. Interesting, however.

Greek men sing and dance all the time. Without the ladies.

Frequently about a dozen Greek fishermen would appear at the restaurant for lunch. Joined by the village priest. They sang as a group for a couple of hours.

Me, my blog, some good Greek food, and them! What more could I ask for?

Key West is getting back on the ball in fighting the virus. We were doing well. Then the political leaders succumbed to the cries of the businessmen and reopened our community.

The numbers have gone up.

The writing is on the wall.

As of today, all bar service and bar counters is closed to seating and consumption.

Good! Will dissuade the mainland folks from coming to Key West weekends to party. They bring their germs with them. We do not need them to infect us.

Governor De Santis has done a wonderful job. He has Florida totally screwed up with the virus. Understandable why. He sucks up to and follow Trump’s dictates. Trump says De Santis is the best governor in the U.S. No wonder.

U.S.1 should be closed again. All non-residents banned from entering the Keys. I believe our County and City officials want to do so. De Santis has the final say. So far, no.

May Johnson’s heart continues throbbing for boy friend Ernest who lives and works in Miami. Her suffering appears minimal only. Most evenings she is at La Brisa dancing with everyone.

For this day in 1896, May wrote in her diary: “1 year ago tonight I met my darling. Oh! Happy thought.” A few lines later, May reported: “Went to La Brisa. I danced all dances but two.”

No blog tomorrow. I will be spending the morning at the hospital taking tests. Not for coronavirus.

I am upset. This is day 120 of my self-quarantine. I have left the house only 2 times. Each for less than an hour. To see the doctor. Now I have to go to one of the worst places to be at this time.

Enjoy your day!

 

 

34 comments on “U.S. SUPREME COURT NEEDS REDOING

  1. Trump says the kids are tough and will be fine in school. They may kill their parents when they get home, but we will cross that bridge when we come to it.

  2. Who is responsible for the structure, rules and procedures of the federal court system? This is not a smarta$$ question or troll. Seriously, who decides how many federal judges there should be, and who has the power to streamline the judicial process? Is it Congress? Anyone know?

    • I know you say you said this is not a smarta$$ question or troll. But then why would you ask this question on Lou’s blog, rather than looking it up on Google just like everyone else would have to do to understand or reply?

      I typed that exact phrase into google and got a complete answer immediately without any problem whatsoever and it took me less time that it would have take you to post your question on Lou’s Blog.

      • I mentioned the judicial process on Lou’s blog because Lou made it a topic on His blog. Google takes you to the Judiciary Act of 1789 which is fine as far as it goes. It gives the responsibility broadly to Congress. I doubt that you got a complete answer on Google because the subject is enormously complex. I, for one, am too lazy to dig through 230 years of it.. Lou is suggesting that streamlining is possible, and I still wonder where that might begin. I suppose any changes would have to originate in the House or Senate Judiciary committees, but there may be another way to go about it. Can district courts add judges and clerks without congressional approval? I don’t know. Just a question. No need for hostility.

        • Thomas J., Any comment on here that doesn’t tow the line set by the moderator, is met with name calling, (sissy, snowflake, little lady, or some other gay-bashing term), accusation of being a troll and repeated badgering until you stop posting, as she has to have the last word.

          Just post your comments and ignore her.

          You made an excellent point and posed a great on-topic response for Lou, by the way.

        • Thomas J. – First of all, There was NO hostility in my reply to your original post on Lou’s blog and you should not read that into anything someone else writes which YOU may take offense with. Your accusation is by itself the account of hostility.

          I simply questioned why you would ask Lou, or anyone on his blog about something that you could have looked up yourself. If you found that hostile and offensive, I think you should spend less time answering Lou’s blog posts +and more time with a therapist.

          It occurred to me then that your comment that “this is not a smarta$$ question or troll” seemed a little odd, now I really wonder if the original post was itself disingenuous and your reply to my reply even more so.

  3. I think you may be a little over zealous and making azzumptions that are not true in your criticisms of my reply to Thomas J.’s posts. I made no, what YOU call, “name calling,” such as “sissy,” “snowflake,” “little lady,” or any other so-called “gay-bashing terms.” what so ever. I happen to be gay myself and take offense at that.

    Your quick defense and praise for Thomas J’s posts seem a bit too over the top with azzumptions to be accepted as innocent or real, if you ask me.

    • Thomas J. – First of all, There was NO hostility in my reply to your original post on Lou’s blog and you should not read that into anything someone else writes which YOU may take offense with. Your accusation is by itself the account of hostility.

      I simply questioned why you would ask Lou, or anyone on his blog about something that you could have looked up yourself. If you found that hostile and offensive, I think you should spend less time answering Lou’s blog posts and more time with a therapist.

      It occurred to me then that your comment that “this is not a smarta$$ question or troll” seemed a little odd, now I really wonder if the original post was itself disingenuous and your reply to my reply even more so.

      • I can see that I totally misunderstood the way blogs were meant to work. I foolishly thought that guests on a blog page were free to express comments, agree/disagree, or ask questions about the Host’s topic. I already admitted to being too lazy to devote hours of study to the American judicial system just to satisfy an idle question. But Lou has argued cases in federal court, and I believe there are other attorneys that read this blog who might have responded. I was, admittedly, seeking an easy answer.

        Interesting that Manny criticizes me for asking an on-topic question, while not offering any comments related to Lou’s topic.. And, yes, Manny’s off-topic criticisms of me and suggestions that I should see a therapist are hostile.

        • Twist all you want, your efforts to manipulate even your own posts and accuse everyone around you of being hostile towards you, seem more to just to change the subject, than to answer anything directly. You are not as clever as you may think.

          I don’t see anywhere Manny said anything about you having off-topic comments. Yet all of your replies to him include YOUR criticism of him having done so. His whole point seems to me to have been that you are disingenuous in your posts and not being truthful. You seem to be proving his point for him with every reply.

          • Wow! No hostility here. Nope. Not a bit. Do Manny and Tim even remember what the topic was about? Something about federal courts? I didn’t see any mention of it from them.

            • Yes, I do! If you would look at my posts and actually read them, rather than come on here and simply shout “FIRE” you would see that I mention the original topic in every one. You on the other hand, blabber on making false accusations without knowing what you are talking about, apparently just trying to pick a fight and start an argument so that you can complain about everyone trying to muzzle your opinions.

                • But NOT OK when referring to something for the sole purpose of provocation, or when used deceptively, as you did with your post.

                  • Hoo boy! I’ve posted on this blog like four times and I’m already the enemy! Already accused of blabber (huh?), false accusations and provocation. This is great! Start a new topic, Lou. Let’s stir up some more random cranky and angry comments!

                    • If the shoe fits, wear it!

                      You have posted 4 times using that name, many more using other names. +

  4. Oh, I have a list of your responses to me and others, using all those terms and more. You’re not fooling anyone. I know that you are gay, that is what makes your gay-bashing comments so bizarre.

    Try not to cry yourself to sleep for being exposed on here.

    • Prove it Snowflake, put your proof where your mouth is. Let’s see those BAD words you want to make the Lou’s world think are sooooo wrong. Book it Dano!

      • Your post:“Prove it Snowflake “

        Preceded by this post of yours: “ I made no, what YOU call, “name calling,” such as “sissy,” “SNOWFLAKE,” “little lady,” or any other so-called “gay-bashing terms.” what so ever“

        You should look up the term, self-awareness

        Lou needs to hire a less bitter moderator than you to keep his blog running.

        • What post is that, when and where? please be specific and not all twisty and elusive. You accused me and now you are trying to wiggle out with nothing but nonsense. Add “phony stuffed shirt” to the terms I use, this one specifically towards you!

            • Trying to wiggle out of this with phone facts? Anyone looking at posts for these last few days will not find a single post from ME, with what YOU call, “name calling,” such as: “sissy,” “SNOWFLAKE,” “little lady,” or any other so-called “gay-bashing terms.” what so ever“

            • Furthermore, you have to be pretty thin skinned to consider: “sissy,” “SNOWFLAKE,” “little lady,” or any other so-called “gay-bashing terms.” “bad words“

              Try stop accusing everybody else of maligning YOU, and spend some time concentrating on trying to post honest and factual garbage, for a change.

              Stop putting false words in other people’s mouths

                • Perhaps you want a redo on that Ano? Or, are you trying to be clever again? This (below) is my exact (and complete) post of July 10 @456 PM:

                  “Manny on July 10, 2020 at 4:56 pm said:

                  Prove it Snowflake, put your proof where your mouth is. Let’s see those BAD words you want to make the Lou’s world think are sooooo wrong. Book it Dano!
                  Reply ↓ ”

                  As you can see it, like ALL my other posts does not say what you said is says, not even close.

                  You don’t seem to have much of a grip on reality and think your smarter than everybody else. Either that or you are completely dishonest or entirely incorrigible.

  5. Trump wants to create a race of walking, sickly, half dead zombies who will keep the economy functioning in order to maintain the life styles of the rich and famous. So pack together at those pool parties and breathe all over each other, hipsters, you are doing just what he wants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.