Comments on: The ACLU and forum shopping in NSA case http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Mon, 13 Feb 2012 10:08:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: ThatPoliticalBlog http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/comment-page-1/#comment-54645 ThatPoliticalBlog Wed, 29 Nov 2006 05:01:37 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/#comment-54645 <strong>Terrorists Bill of Rights Part II</strong> I think back to stories I heard from my parents and grandparents about life during the world wars, the rationing and shortages of everything. Tires were almost impossible to get. Sugar, nylons, gasoline all were rationed and highly valued commodities. The Terrorists Bill of Rights Part II
I think back to stories I heard from my parents and grandparents about life during the world wars, the rationing and shortages of everything. Tires were almost impossible to get. Sugar, nylons, gasoline all were rationed and highly valued commodities. The

]]> By: Iowa Voice http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/comment-page-1/#comment-54644 Iowa Voice Mon, 28 Aug 2006 13:28:49 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/#comment-54644 <strong>Novak: Eavesdropping Ruling A Judicial Farce</strong> Robert Novak weighs in on the recent ruling by a liberal activist judge on the NSA wiretapping case: The background of a federal district court declaring President Bush's national security eavesdropping unconstitutional was a conservative's fantas... Novak: Eavesdropping Ruling A Judicial Farce
Robert Novak weighs in on the recent ruling by a liberal activist judge on the NSA wiretapping case:

The background of a federal district court declaring President Bush’s national security eavesdropping unconstitutional was a conservative’s fantas…

]]> By: L. Fafarman http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/comment-page-1/#comment-54643 L. Fafarman Fri, 25 Aug 2006 05:01:50 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/#comment-54643 I think it is more an issue of "perceived bias" rather than "conflict of interest." I think that the term "conflict of interest" should be restricted to situations where a judge actually stands to benefit financially, where the judge is an officer or a member of an organization that is a party to the case, or where the judge is a relative or a close personal friend of a party. It would be difficult or impossible to eliminate all perceived biases — for example, Associate Justice Ginsburg was once an attorney for the ACLU. As for Judge Taylor, I think that the perceived bias would still be there if the donation to the ACLU had occurred before she became a judge rather than after. However, I think that to minimize the possibility of a perceived bias, a newly appointed judge should immediately quit all positions and all memberships that are likely to generate a perceived bias. What if, for example, Judge Taylor had ruled the other way in ACLU v. NSA and it was then disclosed that she had approved a donation to StoptheACLU? There was no good reason at all for her to be an officer of that organization that donated to the ACLU. To the maximum extent possible, a judge — like Caesar's wife — should be above suspicion. At the very least, Taylor should have disclosed the ACLU connection at the start of the trial in order to avoid the possibility of future problems concerning the connection. I think that one of the reasons why Detroit was chosen as a venue is that the Detroit area -- notably Dearborn -- has a large population of people of Arab descent, who are the most likely people to be affected by the ruling. I think there is a good possibility, though, that this judge was handpicked with the assistance of an insider in the office of the court clerk. As a pro se litigant, I have seen a lot of collusion in the courts. Bigoted Ed "It's My Way or the Highway" Brayton has again displayed his usual inability to see both sides of a story — his article on this subject is titled, "Silly Accusations Against Judge Taylor." See http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/08/silly_accusations_against_judg_1.php I would like to post these comments on Ed's blog too, but I am permanently banned there because he did not like my literal interpretation of a federal court rule. I think it is more an issue of “perceived bias” rather than “conflict of interest.” I think that the term “conflict of interest” should be restricted to situations where a judge actually stands to benefit financially, where the judge is an officer or a member of an organization that is a party to the case, or where the judge is a relative or a close personal friend of a party. It would be difficult or impossible to eliminate all perceived biases — for example, Associate Justice Ginsburg was once an attorney for the ACLU. As for Judge Taylor, I think that the perceived bias would still be there if the donation to the ACLU had occurred before she became a judge rather than after. However, I think that to minimize the possibility of a perceived bias, a newly appointed judge should immediately quit all positions and all memberships that are likely to generate a perceived bias. What if, for example, Judge Taylor had ruled the other way in ACLU v. NSA and it was then disclosed that she had approved a donation to StoptheACLU? There was no good reason at all for her to be an officer of that organization that donated to the ACLU. To the maximum extent possible, a judge — like Caesar’s wife — should be above suspicion. At the very least, Taylor should have disclosed the ACLU connection at the start of the trial in order to avoid the possibility of future problems concerning the connection.

I think that one of the reasons why Detroit was chosen as a venue is that the Detroit area — notably Dearborn — has a large population of people of Arab descent, who are the most likely people to be affected by the ruling.

I think there is a good possibility, though, that this judge was handpicked with the assistance of an insider in the office of the court clerk. As a pro se litigant, I have seen a lot of collusion in the courts.

Bigoted Ed “It’s My Way or the Highway” Brayton has again displayed his usual inability to see both sides of a story — his article on this subject is titled, “Silly Accusations Against Judge Taylor.” See http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/08/silly_accusations_against_judg_1.php

I would like to post these comments on Ed’s blog too, but I am permanently banned there because he did not like my literal interpretation of a federal court rule.

]]> By: Radaractive http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/comment-page-1/#comment-54642 Radaractive Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:13:49 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/#comment-54642 <strong>The ACLU &#38; ethically challenged judge = danger to</strong> Judge shopping? I heard on the radio that the ACLU considered nine different venues for their filing. But here is something: The ACLU &#38;#38; ethically challenged judge = danger to
Judge shopping? I heard on the radio that the ACLU considered nine different venues for their filing. But here is something:

]]> By: Don Surber http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/comment-page-1/#comment-54641 Don Surber Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:46:24 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/08/21/the-aclu-and-forum-shopping-in-nsa-case/#comment-54641 <strong>Judge shopping 101</strong> Stop the ACLU also said it was judge shopping. Judge shopping 101
Stop the ACLU also said it was judge shopping.

]]>