Politics Justice Clarence Thomas Asks Questions in Court, 1st Time in 10 Years

[Denny Crane]

http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/l...-in-court-1st-time-in-10-years-370509211.html

He's rarely asked questions during oral arguments before the court.

 

[Denny Crane]

FWIW, I'm a big fan of all the justices.

 

[jlprk]

I have all their cards, but chewed the gum long ago. Still got it though.

 

[MarAzul]

"Thomas then asked how long the suspension of the right to own a firearm lasts.

Eisenstein said it was indefinite."

Is there any other case where a misdemeanor can get a persons Constitutional right suspended indefinitely?

 

[jlprk]

Not a lawyer, but I would guess that there are many. The bigger story is, Clarence Thomas is an even worse judge than the highly partisan Scalia.

 

[MarAzul]

I have all their cards, but chewed the gum long ago. Still got it though.

Wow! Very impressive! Back when I chewed gum that came with cards, I don't think I knew one justice. No doubt I would have simple chucked the card.

 

[MarAzul]

I would guess that there are many

My guess is, there are none. I also think this one should not exist.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Sounds like a winner!

In one of the cases, Stephen Voisine pleaded guilty in 2003 to simple assault after slapping his girlfriend in the face while he was intoxicated. In 2009, an anonymous caller reported that Voisine had shot a bald eagle with a rifle. He was then convicted under the gun law.​

 

[jlprk]

My guess is, there are none. I also think this one should not exist.

I would need to see a list of what is a misdemeanor nowadays (a short list) and what is a felony (practically all crimes that you hear about). The biggest travesty of the evil legal system since the 80s is that Republicans have moved almost all of the former into the latter. You fished without a license? 2 days in jail. Etc., etc.

 

[MarAzul]

Republicans have moved almost all of the former into the latter

Where the hell are you speaking of? I can't think of a place west of Texas where the Republicans are in charge of anything.

 

[Denny Crane]

I would need to see a list of what is a misdemeanor nowadays (a short list) and what is a felony (practically all crimes that you hear about). The biggest travesty of the evil legal system since the 80s is that Republicans have moved almost all of the former into the latter. You fished without a license? 2 days in jail. Etc., etc.

The article and Thomas' questions seem to be about moving the latter into the former.

The guy in the case has two black marks. He struck a woman, domestic violence, one time (that we know of), 13 years ago. No gun involved. On this fact alone, is he a risk to shoot his girlfriend? Doesn't seem so to me.

The second mark against him is that he shot a bald eagle (tastes like chicken!). As far as I'm concerned, ANY crime committed with a gun is deserving of a significant prison term, no parole. I'm ok with the judge using discretion, since not all cases are the same.

 

[oldfisherman]

Sounds like a winner!

In one of the cases, Stephen Voisine pleaded guilty in 2003 to simple assault after slapping his girlfriend in the face while he was intoxicated. In 2009, an anonymous caller reported that Voisine had shot a bald eagle with a rifle. He was then convicted under the gun law.​

Killing a Bald Eagle is a federal felony crime, not a misdemeanor. Convictions carry a maximum fine of $250,000 or two years of imprisonment.

 

[Denny Crane]

From the article in the first post.

But Thomas peppered Eisenstein with several questions about Second Amendment gun rights, a topic no other justice had asked about. He noted that the law allows someone convicted of a misdemeanor assault charge to get a lifetime ban on possessing a gun "which at least as of now results in suspension of a constitutional right.''

"The suspension is not directly related to the use of a weapon?'' Thomas asked.

 

[Denny Crane]

More:

The other case involves William Armstrong III, who pleaded guilty to simple assault in 2002 after pushing his wife during an argument and leaving a "red mark.'' Eight years later, police searching Armstrong's home discovered six firearms and ammunition.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Killing a Bald Eagle is a federal felony crime, not a misdemeanor. Convictions carry a maximum fine of $250,000 or two years of imprisonment.

Good, I guess he lost his gun rights.

 

[dviss1]

I can't think of a place west of Texas where the Republicans are in charge of anything.

Um.... All of Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, and Montana?

 

[oldfisherman]

Good, I guess he lost his gun rights.

It depends on how long his prison sentence was for.

In order to be prohibited from owning a gun under the current Fed law, a convicted felon must have been convicted of a crime that is "punishable by imprisonment for more than one year. But, certain "white collar" crimes that result in a felony conviction don't prohibit those felons from owning guns.

 

[jlprk]

It depends on how long his prison sentence was for. In order to be prohibited from owning a gun under the current Fed law, a convicted felon must have been convicted of a crime that is "punishable by imprisonment for more than one year.

No, it depends upon how long of a supposed standard sentence his crime is assigned. Many felonies, i.e. "crime that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year," routinely get plea-bargained sentences of 1 month or less. The sentence on the books is stated as more than a year (i.e. a felony) in order to mentally torture the accused into taking the plea bargain and not use the court's precious time.

In other words, almost all crimes are included in that category. The distinction between felony and misdemeanor is bullshit.

 

[oldfisherman]

In other words, almost all crimes are included in that category. The distinction between felony and misdemeanor is bullshit.

You make it sound like our prisons are almost empty.

US Federal Prison Overpopulation

Parole was abolished for federal inmates in 1987 and inmates must serve at least 85% of their original sentence before being considered for good-behavior release. In addition, strict-sentencing guidelines were adopted in response to rising crime rates in the 1980s and early 1990s.

The yearly increases in the federal inmate population have raised concerns from criminal justice experts and even among DOJ officials themselves.

Do we also need to get into the overpopulated state, county and local jails?

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm witnessing a beat down.

 

[jlprk]

inmates must serve at least 85% of their original sentence before being considered for good-behavior release.

That's 85% of the inmate's plea bargain, not 85% of the stupendously long standard sentence for the "crime that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year." Almost every trivial crime has been reclassified to a felony in order to scare the accused to give up their right to trial.

 

[oldfisherman]

That's 85% of the inmate's plea bargain, not 85% of the stupendously long standard sentence for the "crime that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year." Almost every trivial crime has been reclassified to a felony in order to scare the accused to give up their right to trial.

According to a report by the Pew Center

Inmates released from prison in 2009 spent an average of 2.9 years — or 36 percent longer behind bars than offenders released in 1990, the report found.

It should also be noted that petty offender’s time in prison were included in the PEW study results to get to the 2.9 year average.

And all of our prisons are overflowing, even the privately owned and operated prisons.

 

[Denny Crane]

According to a report by the Pew Center

Inmates released from prison in 2009 spent an average of 2.9 years — or 36 percent longer behind bars than offenders released in 1990, the report found.

It should also be noted that petty offender’s time in prison were included in the PEW study results to get to the 2.9 year average.

And all of our prisons are overflowing, even the privately owned and operated prisons.

Most of those incarcerated don't belong there.

 

[jlprk]

You and I are arguing different issues. I agree with you on your issue, that sentences have gotten longer. That's my whole point, but I'm finding the cause and you aren't.

 

[oldfisherman]

Almost every trivial crime has been reclassified to a felony in order to scare the accused to give up their right to trial.

Which trivial crimes have been reclassified to a felony? I can not find any.

I did find where CA reclassified some of their non-violent felonies down to misdemeanors. This gave back some of the rights the criminals lost as felons.

http://www.wbur.org/npr/435513407/t...d-some-californian-felons-get-a-second-chance

 

[Stevenson]

Thomas' questions today sounded really very interesting and spot on, which makes it even more of a shame that he hasn't asked a question in 10 years. 10 years.

For that, among other reasons, I think he has been an embarrassingly bad justice.

 

[MarAzul]

Um.... All of Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, and Montana?

jlprk doesn't come from any of those.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Thomas' questions today sounded really very interesting and spot on, which makes it even more of a shame that he hasn't asked a question in 10 years. 10 years.

For that, among other reasons, I think he has been an embarrassingly bad justice.

Thomas was coached on what to say, here's trying to take Scalia's spot on the lucrative speech circuit.

 

[oldfisherman]

I would need to see a list of what is a misdemeanor nowadays (a short list) and what is a felony (practically all crimes that you hear about). The biggest travesty of the evil legal system since the 80s is that Republicans have moved almost all of the former into the latter. You fished without a license? 2 days in jail. Etc., etc.

I know that one is 110% pure BULL SHIT!

 

[MarAzul]

Thomas was coached on what to say, here's trying to take Scalia's spot on the lucrative speech circuit.

Scalia isn't asking questions and not on the speaking circuit. Someone filling in is bound to happen. Only the conservative needs to ask questions, the liberals already know the desired
ruling they need to render.