You also ruled against the CDC's mask mandate on airplanes.
Posted on 10/26/2024 11:16:05 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
I’d be curious what qui tam laws Washington signed... Somehow I don’t think they’re as egregious as this.
These laws have been on the books since the Civil War. They are also called Lincoln”s laws.
“That’s right. The LA Slimes and the rest of the lamestream fake news 📰 🗞 media are truly ignorant.”
I don’t think “ignorant” is the right term.
More like purposefully deceitful.
They’re propaganda organs.
The specific law is from 1986.
Bkmk
Judge [Kathryn Kimball Mizelle] rules federal law banning gun possession in post offices unconstitutional
Just the News ^ | 1/13/24 | John Solomon
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4210095/posts
I didn't have any complaints on this ruling by Mizelle.
But I imagine that Michael Hiltzik and his ABA buds had conniption fits over the ruling...
What could possibly go wrong with the idea that private citizens could use the power of the government to go after people they do not like when even the government was not sure if there was actually fraud?
You also ruled against the CDC's mask mandate on airplanes.
Column: Trump’s judges will keep moving the country to the far right for decades
By Michael Hiltzik | Business Columnist June 10, 2022
little Mikey Hiltzik: Perhaps inevitably, Trump’s younger nominees came to the bench without significant judicial experience or even lawyerly seasoning.
One example is Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, a federal judge in Orlando, who issued a widely ridiculed ruling striking down the federal mask mandate for airlines and other public transportation on April 18. The Biden administration is appealing the ruling.
Seeing as this report is coming from the L.A. Times should give everyone a cause for pause & learn the facts.
In essence, these firms have enough billings to pay for certain of their attorneys to participate in local, state, and national bar association activities and on judicial nominating commissions. In this manner, these firms get enough clout among the judges to have the benefit of the doubt or outright political sway to rig a case when they need to.
More broadly, the effect is to screen against untrusted outsiders and keep them off the bench. Yet such outsiders often have greater honesty and dedication to deciding cases on the merits than insiders compromised by their affiliations.
In addition, the process also tends to empower Leftists who might otherwise generate political heat against the coziness of the system. In return for supporting the judicial influence game, the Leftists work to keep conservatives from getting on the bench.
Thank you for your very good explanation of how these things work.
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.