- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What is the federal precedence for intervention in state refusing to enforce rule of law?
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:17 am
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:17 am
In this case, a mountain of documented and specific evidence, dropping all charges, expunging the record of Smollett, and sealing the existing court records?
What’s to stop other state governments from doing the same? At some point, a line has to be drawn.
What’s to stop other state governments from doing the same? At some point, a line has to be drawn.
This post was edited on 3/26/19 at 11:17 am
14
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:18 am to The Pirate King
The Feds will step in and seize all of those records. He's not free of charges.
...and funding may be cut.
...and funding may be cut.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:19 am to The Pirate King
MOAR GUB'MINT!!!!!!
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:19 am to The Pirate King
quote:
What’s to stop other state governments from doing the same?
They're already doing so with sanctuary cities and states.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:20 am to hogcard1964
quote:
The Feds will step in and seize all of those records. He's not free of charges.
They should probably have FBI agents waiting to cuff him and take him into custody now.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:21 am to Erin Go Bragh
It’s Chicago, there is no hope of Justice there, unless you are a minority, and then it’s a crap shoot, literally
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:21 am to The Pirate King
Since the State's Attorney is suppose to represent the people of the state, could the "people" take the office to court and force prosecution? Also, if they want people to participate in the judicial process, then you cannot ask them to sit on a grand jury, return an indictment, then drop charges. I understand plea deals and witness' backing out, but to just drop charges is a slap in the face to all who sat on the grand jury.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:23 am to Johnpettigrew
quote:
Since the State's Attorney is suppose to represent the people of the state, could the "people" take the office to court and force prosecution?
I can't claim to be familiar with Illinois Law, but the "people" can respond by voting this District Attorney out of office.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:23 am to The Pirate King
Well, i guess it might have to deal with whether or not that federal crimes were committed.
In the case of the New Mexico compound, the state screwed up royally. Claimed prosecutors failed to file charges in time so the criminals walked free from prosecution. However, the guns they possessed among other charges were federal violations and the feds then took over the case indicted.
In the case of the New Mexico compound, the state screwed up royally. Claimed prosecutors failed to file charges in time so the criminals walked free from prosecution. However, the guns they possessed among other charges were federal violations and the feds then took over the case indicted.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:25 am to The Pirate King
You basically have a States Attorney that is elected and knuckled to local political pressure. She punted, and she'll be a heroine in the Minority Community, But Smollett still has the Fed's to worry about.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:26 am to The Pirate King
There’s two ways the feds can “step in”.
1) Did he commit a federal crime? If yes, then charge him. If he only committed state crimes, feds can’t charge.
2) Feds could investigate the Chicago DA for a civil rights violation. Was Smollett an exemplar of unequal justice? Obama’s DOJ did it to conservative states based on the ridiculously idiotic notion of “disparate impact” - in other words, no causation needs to be demonstrated.
1) Did he commit a federal crime? If yes, then charge him. If he only committed state crimes, feds can’t charge.
2) Feds could investigate the Chicago DA for a civil rights violation. Was Smollett an exemplar of unequal justice? Obama’s DOJ did it to conservative states based on the ridiculously idiotic notion of “disparate impact” - in other words, no causation needs to be demonstrated.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:27 am to Ash Williams
Yeah but voting them out could be next year or 5 years from now depending on their election cycles. When there are statue of limitations, waiting to go to the booth is not always an option.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:27 am to The Pirate King
quote:
In this case, a mountain of documented and specific evidence, dropping all charges, expunging the record of Smollett, and sealing the existing court records?
What’s to stop other state governments from doing the same? At some point, a line has to be drawn.
So you don't understand federalism at all.
State officials can do what they want under state law. If the people of the state don't like it they can vote someone new in. It's not the place of the federal government to intervene in state law matters.
But if he committed a federal crime, the feds can prosecute.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:28 am to The Pirate King
quote:
What is the federal precedence for intervention in state refusing to enforce rule of law?
Happens all the time in the south. Hundreds of cases where the feds have come in to convict someone the state either wouldn't charge or was acquitted.
This is also the very reason federal hate crimes exist. Feds wanted a way to charge white people in the south that juries wouldn't convict.
This post was edited on 3/26/19 at 11:30 am
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:28 am to OchoDedos
quote:
You basically have a States Attorney that is elected and knuckled to local political pressure. She punted, and she'll be a heroine in the Minority Community
I wonder if Smollett paid her with a check too.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:32 am to The Pirate King
I missed all of this. What was the reason given for dropping charges? Gay, black, rich privilege?
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:33 am to GRTiger
quote:
I missed all of this. What was the reason given for dropping charges? Gay, black, rich privilege?
Prosecutor had a conflict: Friend of the Obamas
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:35 am to Johnpettigrew
quote:
Yeah but voting them out could be next year or 5 years from now depending on their election cycles. When there are statue of limitations, waiting to go to the booth is not always an option.
She's up for re-election next year and will face a primary in the spring. The Cook County SA office is a highly contested office, and she was already facing a primary. Cook County is about half white (includes a lot of the inner ring suburbs) and less than a 1/4 African-American.
My guess is that she knows that she won't be running for re-election, and she doesn't care that much about burning bridges on the way out.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:36 am to GRTiger
His prior service to the community. 
They literally pulled a reason out of their arse.
They literally pulled a reason out of their arse.
Posted on 3/26/19 at 11:38 am to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
My guess is that she knows that she won't be running for re-election, and she doesn't care that much about burning bridges on the way out.
And she was promised a generous “bonus” upon leaving office. Unless of course they were dumb enough to have already paid her.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News