A star is born. The big news in appeals court ruling in the House’s subpoena for President Trump’s tax records is not that the court supports it, though that’s no small thing. It’s the dissent by the newly minted appeals judge on the D.C. Circuit, Neomi Rao. She reckons that the way House is going after Mr. Trump violates the constitutional prohibition against bills of attainder.
Brava, your honor. The chief editorial writer of the Sun has been singing this song since Senator Biden and his Judiciary Committee colleagues launched their attack on Justice-to-be Clarence Thomas. The prohibition on bills of attainder, in which a legislature condemns an individual, are flatly prohibited, both to the state and federal governments. They’re as un-American as titles of nobility.
Judge Rao cuts through the House’s humbug about how this investigation is being made pursuant to the legislative power — as if what the House wants is better laws regulating the president. If that had been its interest, of course, the House would have been trying for generations to pass laws cramping our presidents. The judge gets that the claims to a legislative purpose are gossamer..........To Read More....
My Take - Does all of this remind anyone of anything? Try thinking in terms of the show trials of the Soviet Union. But, take a look any of the socialist governments that have ever come into being, from the French Revolution to today, they create predetermined show trials to eliminate their opponents, for having the audicity to disagree with their tyranny.
Judge Rao cuts through the House’s humbug about how this investigation is being made pursuant to the legislative power — as if what the House wants is better laws regulating the president. If that had been its interest, of course, the House would have been trying for generations to pass laws cramping our presidents. The judge gets that the claims to a legislative purpose are gossamer..........To Read More....
My Take - Does all of this remind anyone of anything? Try thinking in terms of the show trials of the Soviet Union. But, take a look any of the socialist governments that have ever come into being, from the French Revolution to today, they create predetermined show trials to eliminate their opponents, for having the audicity to disagree with their tyranny.
One more thing. Fascists and communists are both socialists, right along with progressives and modern liberals and the Democrat party.
Also, I think it advisable to add this explanation of Bill of Attainder.
A bill of attainder (also known as an act of attainder or writ of attainder or bill of pains and penalties) is an act of a legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them, often without a trial.
As with attainder resulting from the normal judicial process, the effect of such a bill is to nullify the targeted person's civil rights, most notably the right to own property (and thus pass it on to heirs), the right to a title of nobility, and, in at least the original usage, the right to life itself. Bills of attainder passed in Parliament by Henry VIII on 29 January 1542 resulted in the executions of a number of notable historical figures.
The use of these bills by Parliament eventually fell into disfavour due to the obvious potential for abuse and the violation of several legal principles, most importantly the right to due process, the precept that a law should address a particular form of behaviour rather than a specific individual or group, and the separation of powers............
The United States Constitution forbids legislative bills of attainder: in federal law under Article I, Section 9, and in state law under Article I, Section 10. The fact that they were banned even under state law reflects the importance that the framers attached to this issue.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment