Stefanik requested an ethics investigation into U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell for a speech she gave in November, in which she said the country was at risk of falling into authoritarianism.
"Judge Howell's partisan speech is obviously highly inappropriate election interference by a federal judge that undermines the public's trust in our courts," Stefanik wrote.
What's up with all of this mumble-mouth crap? — GRWelsh
This entry examines philosophical accounts of tort law, distinguishing its obligations from other types of private legal obligation, and distinguishing its characteristic remedies from the punitive responses of the criminal law and from administrative regulation. It focuses exclusively on tort law within common law systems, that is, legal systems descended from English law, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, the United States. Other legal systems, originating in continental Europe, are usually described as “civilian” systems. They have detailed civil codes covering many of the same issues as the common law of torts. Some civilian systems share many doctrinal features with common-law system; others, particularly France, offer fundamentally different ways of dealing with the same set of interactions and the problems to which they give rise. — Arthur Ripstein
Even if this damages practice passes constitutional muster, the ideal of due process does not disappear. As compared to current practice, the tort system could adopt a more constitutionally defensible method or determining pain-and-suffering damages by being more true to the constitutional values of notice, predictability, and reasoned decision-making. Such a tort system may also be more secure from legislative reforms like the tort-reform bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in March 1995, which capped pain-and-suffering damages in a section of the bill entitled "Limitation on Speculative and Arbitrary Damage Awards."8 2
As the issue of pain-and-suffering damages illustrates, the tort system can be guided by the ideal of due process without abandoning its reliance on fairness and individual rights. In a rights-based tort system, damages for pain and suffering provide redress for rights-violations. Money is not equivalent with the right, nor can money represent the value of the pain and suffering. These characteristics of the tort right do not imply that there is no method for determining the appropriate form of redress for a rights-violation. Au tort right creates a corresponding duty of care for the duty-holder. To determine the safety precautions required of the duty-holder, the standard of care must monetize pain-and-suffering injuries. To violate the plaintiff's right, the defendant must have breached the duty of care in a manner that caused injury to the plaintiff, making it appropriate to redress the rights-violation by relying on the way in which the standard of care monetizes the injury. Not only does the nature of the tort right provide a method for determining the amount of damages, it also provides the foundation for a tort award that can be securely defended from constitutional attack — Geistfeld
The judge later ruled that they were false and defamatory. But now Giuliani is pulling a remarkable public about-face. In an interview outside the courthouse on Monday night, Giuliani claimed that “everything I said about them” — the two women — “is true.”
“Of course I don’t regret it,” Giuliani said. “I told the truth. They were engaged in changing votes.”
When it was pointed out that there remains no proof of that, Giuliani responded, “You’re damn right there is. Stay tuned.” — Aaron Blake
In an interview outside the courthouse on Monday night, Giuliani claimed that “everything I said about them” — Aaron Blake
What kind of person would do what Giuliani did? You ruined people's lives, and for what? To prove your loyalty to Trump? — GRWelsh
He emulates his mentor, who has developed quite a following with this sort of behavior.It beggars belief that he will still maintain this obvious lie in the face of all that is happening — Wayfarer
If the justification for punitive damages is to stop the injury from being repeated, the dollar amount was not enough. — Paine
I agree with Frum's tautological statement. — Fooloso4
I agree with Frum's tautological statement. I also agree that it is wrong to regard anyone who looks to secure the borders is a fascist. But what Trump is saying goes far beyond border enforcement. The borders could be closed today but based on what he is saying the immigration problem would remain. If immigrants are poisoning "our" blood then the distinction between legal and illegal immigration is dissolved. What is to be done with them? Sequestered? Deported? What about their children? Are they too poisonous? How many generations back should we go? — Fooloso4
America needs an influx of young workers to prop up social security and medicare. — RogueAI
I don't think it's tautological. — RogueAI
Frum is saying that voters value border security so strongly that they'll pick fascists to do it over liberals who won't. That's not true by definition. — RogueAI
As I say in the next sentence, it is wrong to regard anyone who does Y as X. Many liberals recognize the need for border security. The question is how to go about doing that. The problem of thinking that anyone who advocates for border security is a fascist is that it blurs the meaning of the term and opens the door to actual fascists.
Some voters might put it in the hands of actual fascists. I would like to think that most voters would not choose fascism, but I am no longer confident that is the case. — Fooloso4
I think you're misreading Frum's quote. — RogueAI
He's not saying border security is a fascist thing. — RogueAI
He's saying that given a choice between fascists who happen to police the border and liberals who won't, Americans will pick the fascists. — RogueAI
The question before the United States and other advanced countries is not: Immigration, yes or no? In a mobile world, there will inevitably be quite a lot of movement of people. Immigration is not all or nothing. The questions to ask are: How much? What kind?
The question is how to go about doing that. — Fooloso4
The extremism and authoritarianism that have surged within the developed world since 2005 draw strength from many social and economic causes. Immigration is only one of them.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.