RE: Oregon decision

[pepperbear]

"Legal experts who reviewed the case before the ruling warned that he could reject it on those grounds. A lawsuit from an individual who alleged federal agents violated their freedom of speech or rights against unconstitutional search and seizure would have a much higher chance of success, Michael Dorf, a professor of constitutional law at Cornell University, said ahead of the ruling."

If I'm reading this correctly, the state couldn't stop the Feds based on anecdotes and events that hadn't happened but might happen, but, say, an individual who was grabbed off the street and whisked away in a van without due process might better be able to prove injury and civil rights violations. Does anyone else read it that way?


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-denies-oregon-push-limit-federal-agents-during-arrests-n1234898

[bobbieinok]

1. That offers some reassurance. Thanks for the info

[appalachiablue]

2. K/R

[Laelth]

3. The case was decided upon lack of standing.

That’s an interesting argument. If the Attorney General of Oregon lacks standing to bring this complaint, who DOES have standing? Whomever that person or entity may be, they should bring suit immediately. The judge didn’t rule on the merits of the case. The judge only ruled on the issue of standing.

In other words, the judge is open to ruling against the government if only the proper party files suit, and the AG of Oregon IS NOT the injured/aggrieved party.

-Laelth

[pepperbear]

4. I believe you are correct.

[LeftInTX]

5. That's the problem with Twitter videos

One was actually removed from the case because it didn't happen in Portland.
This left one twitter video and Pettibone's account.

I bet if they had videos of large scale brutality they would have gotten the order. It "feels" like large scale brutality to me, but who am I? I'm just an armchair QB..

[Thekaspervote]

6. Yes

[Gothmog]

7. Here is a great plaintiff

Link to tweet

[LeftInTX]

8. Yes

Something doesn't sit right with this case.

You also have the person injured by the rubber bullets

And you also have inmates at the jail who are having problems with all the tear gas.

Maybe I'm seeing it through my own bias, but the judge's ruling seems so wrong. Even though the judge is a Republican, something is amiss

Couldn't the city claim the federal agents are making the City of Portland unsafe? They would have standing for that..😆

[Gothmog]

9. Here Is another plaintiff

Link to tweet

?s=20

[DallasNE]

10. Judge Mosman Was Appointed To The District Court By George W. Bush In 2003

That should dictate in part how you prepare your case. They should have been very aware of the "standing" issue and taken steps to nullify that as an outcome. Now these thugs have the green light to do whatever they want. But the laws are stacked against the indivi dual because what individual has the financial resources to go up against government lawyers with their unlimited budgets. When you don't have standing, nothing else matters.

This also shows how weak the Bill of Rights are. The Executive is supreme. There is no 3 co-equal branches of government. The weakest branch is the Legislative branch. They are supposed to have the power of the purse but as this shows the President can declare an emergency and that grants him the power of the purse. What we are seeing here is a repeat of what happened in Michigan under Synder where he declared an emergency and appointed an emergency manager that had the power, not the elected Mayor. Too many years of conservative judges ruling against the people. They are appointed for life. It may well be that with our rigged system it may be necessary for violence to take place because all of the other, preferred, avenues have been closed off. It is not what I want but as the events in Portland are showing, the federal government is the top dog and don't you ever doubt it. Next stop, Trump declares an emergency and delays the election indefinitely. While that is not yet a prediction it is moving in that direction daily.