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

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
FWIW, I'm a big fan of all the justices.
 
I have all their cards, but chewed the gum long ago. Still got it though.
 
"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?
 
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.
 
jlprk said:
I have all their cards, but chewed the gum long ago. Still got it though.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.​
 
MarAzul said:
My guess is, there are none. I also think this one should not exist.
Click to expand...

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.
 
jlprk said:
Republicans have moved almost all of the former into the latter
Click to expand...

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.
 
jlprk said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
SlyPokerDog said:
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.​
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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 said:
Good, I guess he lost his gun rights.
Click to expand...

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.
 
oldfisherman said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
jlprk said:
In other words, almost all crimes are included in that category. The distinction between felony and misdemeanor is bullshit.
Click to expand...

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?
 
I'm witnessing a beat down.

;)
 
oldfisherman said:
inmates must serve at least 85% of their original sentence before being considered for good-behavior release.
Click to expand...

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.
 
jlprk said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
oldfisherman said:
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.
Click to expand...
Most of those incarcerated don't belong there.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
Stevenson said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

I know that one is 110% pure BULL SHIT!
 
SlyPokerDog said:
Thomas was coached on what to say, here's trying to take Scalia's spot on the lucrative speech circuit.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hunter
Irony Regarding Obama's Comment About Clarence Thomas
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
huevonkiller
huevonkiller
SlyPokerDog
Politics Lawyers with supreme court business paid Clarence Thomas aide via Venmo
Replies
14
Views
1K
Rastapopoulos
Rastapopoulos
B
Biden on Justice Clarance Thomas
Replies
0
Views
349
BLAZER PROPHET
B
Denny Crane
Toobin: Obama healthcare reform law 'in grave, grave trouble'
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
BLAZER PROPHET
B
Chris Craig
OT Roe V Wade In Trouble
70 71 72
Replies
2K
Views
131K
Phatguysrule
Phatguysrule

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top