Posted on 06/06/2018 4:27:10 PM PDT by RightGeek
A federal judge in Mississippi uses a fraud case as a vehicle for his social agenda.
On Friday in Mississippi, federal District Judge Carlton Reeves surprised government lawyers by ordering that the appointment of a receiver to recover assets for fraud victims should serve as a vehicle to promote diversity in the legal profession.
“It is indisputable that systematic oppression lies behind much of the judiciary’s lack of diversity,” wrote the Obama appointee in his order establishing a process to select a receiver to go after the money taken from investors. Judge Reeves added that “when given the opportunity, courts should take steps to increase their diversity. Justice is a search for truth. That search will fail if a court does not incorporate a wide array of experiences, facts, and perspectives into its decision making processes.”
As far as this column can tell, the case itself doesn’t have anything to do with racial or sexual discrimination. And while defrauded investors surely value the search for truth, they are also no doubt eager for a receiver to begin an immediate search for their money.
Last month Jackson, Mississippi’s Clarion Ledger newspaper reported that there are unfortunately many such victims:
...
The defendant seems to have been at least as eager to defraud other white men as he was to victimize people in any other demographic category. The Clarion Ledger previously noted that among the victims was the state’s Republican U.S. Sen. Roger Wicker.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
It’s way to hard to fire wacky judges.
So more women and minorities should be appointed as receivers or the receivers need to more eagerly go after the assets on behalf of women and minorities? This is some craziness.
More details can be found here:
http://kingfish1935.blogspot.com/2018/06/judge-in-lamar-adams-case-no-so-fast-my.html
Thanks - that has much more detail and no paywall
“....Obama appointee....”
Another black liberal racist. No need to read any further.
Diversity turns out to be a code word for cheating your way into high paying jobs for low IQ Africans. If you can’t do the job, get the job under a forced diversity program. Clearly, if diversity had any thing to do with success it would not be necessary to force this scam on the public.
They are not wacky, but they are liars and frauds.
No problem. When I come across a paywall, I have found through doing searches that there are usually other articles on the subject that are not behind a paywall.
Diversity isn’t a virtue.
In the hands of the Left it’s all affectation, a show.
Systematic oppression is pervasive throughout the NFL and NCAA against white players. There is a caste system of positions whites are seldom or never given the chance to ay no matter how much they outperform black athletes. There should be a class action suit OF WHITE athletes against the NFL and college recruiters.
The receiver pretty much controls the available assets to distributes to the victims. The receiver and accountants he hires are at the front of the line and get paid before any of the victims. A receiver will generally stretch out the case for as long as possible in order to maximize his fees.
How does a guy like this get appointed by “voice vote” when both Mississippi Senators are Republicans and the GOP had a Senate majority in 2010?
Oops...
The Democrats had a Senate majority, from 2009 to 2015.
The elephant in the judicial room is the 17th Amendment. No matter the party in power in the Senate, few state-appointed senators would consent to wild-eyed, social justice, Anti-10th Amendment lawyers to the federal bench.
I agree that the 17th Amendment should not have been adopted, and I go further and say that its ratification was irregular. The concluding phrase of Article Vno State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.should properly have been understood to require that the state governments should permanently retain their representation in the senate. Under the 17th Amendment, none of the state governments are represented in the Senate. The people of each state, rather than their state's government, are represented in the Senate.De jure, then, the ratification of the 17th Amendment should have been unanimous to take effect. De facto, each state consented to that usurpation when first it conducted a popular election of one of its US senators.
I assume that the 17th Amendment will never be repealed outright. What I would propose instead, then, is that senators be elected as running mates of governors. At least the governor would have less slack to pass the buck to the Congress when unfunded mandates cripple state budgets.
My proposal would, I admit, require that the terms of senators be changed from six years to either four or eight years in order to align with the gubernatorial elections.
It’s really more of a scheme to get political payoffs.
I have never had the same level of political confidence in the pre-17th Amendment universe that many, many Freepers have.
As far as I can see, most state legislatures have enthusiastically relinquished their 10th Amendment powers to the federal government.
Bottom Line - I am not confident that a U.S. Senate selected by state legislatures would be materially different from a Senate selected by popular votes.
Yes, not all states ratified the 17A. I haven’t researched why those that didn’t went along with popular elections.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.