Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: AndyJackson
is there anywhere in the country where judges actually subscribe to rule of law anymore, or is knowing the judges more important than knowing the law? Just an idle question from a swamp dweller.

Allow me to educate you: The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit had no choice but to overturn Silver's conviction given the United States Supreme Court's UNANIMOUS decision in McDonnell v. United States as to the definition of an "official act" under the federal anti-corruption law at issue. The District Court Judge, in Silver, charged the jury using the nearly identical definition of an "offical act" that the SCOTUS struck down the following year in McDonnell. This is not a case where the Court failed to know or follow the law; rather they followed the law exactly as interpreted by a unanimous Supreme Court.

24 posted on 07/13/2017 10:54:57 AM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Labyrinthos

Thanks. I looked up the case. Yes, if the prosecutor could not nail him for an actual official act, then he should be acquitted. “I didn’t do nothing” should be a legitimate defense to a charge if in fact, no one can show you actually did something substantively corrupt.


25 posted on 07/13/2017 11:28:25 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson