I think I have a picture of that.
Yeah, here it is!
Posted on 05/06/2020 3:53:41 AM PDT by C19fan
The defiant Texas salon owner who refused to close her business despite stay-at-home restrictions and repeated court orders has been sentenced to seven days in jail. Shelley Luther, the owner of Salon a la Mode in Dallas, appeared in court on Tuesday where she was sentenced to seven days behind bars and $7,000 - $500 for each day she opened her business' doors.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
an executive order by the President or Governor carries the force of law...”
In the operation of the exeutive branch and only to those under him in the executive branch. Why bother to have a constitution then say that the guy at the top can just make up any shit he wants?
I think I have a picture of that.
Yeah, here it is!
Not necessarily. For her case though, after reading her statements, from a practical point, she could have pursued a different strategy without going to spend her time in jail. Going to jail doesn’t strengthen her case, but it does bring her case a lot of publicity.
What needs to happen is the GoFundMe money be used to fund appeals all the way to the us supreme Court where a ruling on this case can be heard. These mayor’s, governors, and judges proclamations need to be within a higher law. A declaration of some medical emergency may or may not permit the suspension of the Constitution and bor. I don’t recall reading anything in either document stating they are temporary and can be over ridden with impunity. Courts need to rule so going forward everyone plays by the same set of rules.
ONLY if it is legal and follows the Constitution.
Suppose the president signs an executive order that forces all Caucasians to turn in their firearms?
Or go to jail if they criticize him in public?
There are Constitutional limits to executive orders, whether by the federal president or a state governor.
My thinking is that we haven't seen the last of this case in regards to appeal and further legal review.
I agree. There is something about this woman’s stance that resonates with all who have come to realize that this is not about our safety anymore...This is about our freedom and our God-given rights.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCEUpIg8rE
He likely feels he is a HERO, a shining example of goodness and light.”
It would be interesting to know where he comes down on the question of people sneaking into the country. I wonder how he has ruled in any cases involving such people?
He's a demonRAT judge in a demonRAT city, and is elected by people that vote because of the color of their skin, they have no character {and don't know the meaning of the word}.
He'll get re-elected, as do most demonRATs in and around big cities.
The EO that Abbott issued has yet to be vetted through the courts. He’s using emergency powers that may or may not fly in the face of the constitutional takings clause.
Lawyers will be making tons of money off litigation surrounding the virus situation. Against insurers over the business interruption issue and against political subdivisions from top to bottom. With the latter, of course, all paid by the taxpayers to defend.
“You aND the law and this judge regard this woman and her ability to support herself and her family as being NOTHING. A mere technical aspect in a narrow legal question.”
You are assuming things about me, misinterpreting my position that I am disregarding the woman’s ability to support herself and family, or the unconstitutionality of the law. The injunction did not decide the merits of her case.
My guess is the judge did not find that continued closure of her business would cause her irreparable harm at that point in time. Media pictures of her do not give the appearance that she is in great distress presently. The state restrictions are about to begin lifting. Is she paying a price (lost income) for the closure? No doubt. Not enough apparently for the judge to order her to keep her business open while her case proceeds through the court.
Ah, thanks. There was a picture of him posing with bo.
There is an interesting evidentiary standard involved. Pretty much all law is outcome oriented. If the judges want to shut this woman down, they do. If a different judge wants a different outcome, he just says the first judge got the law wrong.
"A common belief, like common knowledge, does not require evidence to establish its existence, but may be acted upon without proof by the legislature and the courts."
“With the latter, of course, all paid by the taxpayers to defend.”
Maybe there should be a way of ensuring that any government official responsible for usurping his/her authority by restricting/prohibiting the free exercise of one’s constitutionally guaranteed rights should be made to ante up when the dust settles and the authorization is proved to be unlawful. Skin in the game. In this way we may better ensure that such undertakings will not be done lightly.
Nothing should matter more than the Constitution and the rights it guarantees to all Americans. This is the American’s heritage, the American DNA.
This judge is an example of the Nazis in 1918. The Arkansas governor has kept the salons closed because he is bald and does not have a clue what is going on in his own state. In fact it is rumored that after he retires, he has been promised a janitors job at Bill Clintons Library in Little Rock.
This judge is an example of the Nazis in 1918. The Arkansas governor has kept the salons closed because he is bald and does not have a clue what is going on in his own state. In fact it is rumored that after he retires, he has been promised a janitors job at Bill Clintons Library in Little Rock.
I am reminded of Jim Robinson’s tagline.
(Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God)
This lady believes that. This lady lives that.
It’s not even the law.
I wonder if this lady had a lawyer or self represented. The court often, even if not correct, considers only the arguments presented. The argument that she is feeding children and not selfish doesn’t address the legal aspects of the case. So prosecution wins. I think a lawyer might have avoided the arrest and pushed the case down the road. Most cases don’t get resolved on first hearing. Without an attorney, though, she gets railroaded.
Each day is beginning to bring this more and more into focus for me...most days I just shake my head, but others...well, the American in me is there simmering...I’m reminded of (of all things) Hamlet. There is a scene in Act II where he chides himself for his inaction. Here it is, if you want to view:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fje1acYFQg4
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.