Update no.1166

 Update from the Sunland

No.1166

13.5.24 – 19.5.24

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

 

To all,

 

The follow-up news items:

-- At the request of Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, the Arizona Supreme Court granted a 90-day stay to their order Planned Parenthood Arizona v. Mayes [AZ SC No. CV-23-0005-PR (2024)] [U-1161], solving the gap problem [1164]. The action, while positive, still leaves inconsiderable uncertainty to every woman’s fundamental right to privacy and the reproductive rights she has available to her. The referendum on the November election ballot will clarify those right, hopefully.

-- Engineers working on the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse [1159] explosively cut a major problematic section of the bridge structure trapping the massive MV Dali cargo ship. The action is expected to allow the ship to be moved and hasten the clearance of the main channel serving Baltimore Harbor. The ship is expected to return to dock in Baltimore to off-load its containers and undergo repairs to make it seaworthy. I sure hope one of those repairs is the electrical system. We await the NTSB final report 

-- On Tuesday, the second day of testimony in the business fraud case, People of New York v. Trump [NYSC, Cty of NY Indictment No. 71543/2023] [1107], [the person who shall no longer be named] paraded out a bevy of Senate and House sycophant acolytes to New York City to do what he was forbidden to do by Judge Merchan’s gag order. Among those genuflected and kissing the ring that morning was the Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. The others I can kind of understand, they want to remain on the good side of the Orange Jesus, but the Speaker of the House is the speaker of the House, NOT the speaker of the Republican Party and especially not the speaker of the MAGAts or even the Freedom Caucus. Republicans are apparently so bloody desperate to retain what power they have and some semblance of relevance they are readily willing to turn their backs on the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution itself. A very sad reality to watch. Those principles that have sustained us for centuries only matter as long as they win or get their way. Judge Merchan has gone out of his way to show deference to the defendant as the former president and current Republican presumptive nominee; I will argue the judge has gone far beyond what he would do with any other defendant. And yet, the defendant accuses the judge of being corrupt and the district attorney of being politically biased.

Little Fingers is not in the position he is in because of the judge, the district attorney, the president, the Justice Department, the deep state, Rocky & Bullwinkle, or anyone or any agency other than himself. He alone put himself in his current position as an accused felon criminal. He believes he is above the law. He is before the bench and a jury of his peers to be held accountable for his crimes. [The person who shall no longer be named] has only ONE person to blame for his predicament—look in the mirror—himself—no one else, period, full stop, shut the front door.

If he is found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, I will accept the findings of the jury. If he is found guilty, I will accept the findings of the jury. Will Little Fingers do the same? That court room is exactly where he belongs for the charges he is on trial for committing. Several layers of judicial review have decided that the evidence is sufficient to establish probable cause. Now, the jury must decide his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, or not guilty. As for me, from the evidence I have seen, he is guilty. But hey, I thought exactly the same thing in the O.J. Simpson criminal trial [3.October.1995]. We await the jury’s verdict.

 

A reliable contributor to this humble forum sent this message:

“I'm forwarding this because you have the resources to research the Supreme Court decisions involved and because it makes some important points about mental health and law enforcement.”

with the link:

“How Many People Realize Police Have No Legal Duty to Protect Us? – This isn't clickbait, it's established Supreme Court precedent, and we need to talk about it if we're serious about public safety”

by Qasim Rashid

published May 17 [2024]

https://qasimrashid.substack.com/p/how-many-people-realize-police-have?r=mj11&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&triedRedirect=true

My response:

Thank you for forwarding the latest Rashid Blog post. An interesting, thought-provoking article I must say. First, per your message, his citation of two U.S. Supreme Court cases is accurate.

Deshaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services [489 U.S. 189 (1989)]

Castle Rock v. Gonzales [545 U.S. 748 (2005)] [186]

Where I differ with Rashid’s use of the cases is both decisions deal with liability within the context of the law. Like most government agencies, law enforcement enjoys limited immunity, largely with the intention of preventing the law enforcement and judicial structure from being overwhelmed by frivolous lawsuits. We see the phenomenon in reverse with the legal actions of Little Fingers, i.e., using his wealth to overwhelm opponents or entities he disagrees with. What Rashid comes close to connecting is the issue of liability with the serious matter of mental health services. Law enforcement exists to enforce the law; the law does not focus on mental or economic health matters. Thus, the issue is not law enforcement, it is the law. As a consequence, I think Rashid is pointing an accusatory finger at the wrong agency.

That said, Rashid makes some very good points with which we are in broad agreement. He cites the Support Team Assistance Response (STAR) pilot program deployed in Denver, Colorado, that provides limited services short of law enforcement for incidents of suspected mental health problems. By all accounts, the program has had palpable, demonstrable success in improving services to the community. All large cities have much to learn from the STAR program in Denver. We have agreed numerous times that mental health services intervention in numerous situations is a far more positive response than law enforcement. To that end, most cities are woefully deficient in creating and deploying such intermediate intervention services.

I offer a simple caution, mental health difficulties do not provide rationale or mitigation for offenses against public safety. When individuals threaten or cause damage or injury to others or property, a mental health incident becomes a law enforcement matter. No one can offend the public safety (break the law). Mental health problems can never be an excuse for such behavior.

At the bottom line, I would strongly support the establishment of STAR-type intermediate services to avoid using law enforcement for mental health incidents before they become public safety matters.

“That’s just my opinion, but I could be wrong.”

With this follow-up comment:

“Law enforcement exists to maintain order. As those decisions illustrate, not to enforce the law.

“I will add a personal experience. Law enforcement officers can be trained in de-escalation. That is largely a matter of nonverbal communication, and I have seen it in action. I was on a bus a few months ago when an individual boarded who clearly had mental illness issues and also was a potential danger. When a local deputy arrived, he behaved very differently from traditional policing procedures, and he defused the incident with no harm to anyone. I’d love to see that kind of training become standard.

“The STAR type of service is also a proven practice. We can make law enforcement less dangerous to the public. Society has a duty to do that.”

And my follow-up response:

Well, that is difficult to argue against. Yes, absolutely, the law is configured to maintain order, to keep public intercourse within constraints to protect public safety. I do not understand why you apparently believe maintaining order is not enforcing the law. That said, we have far too many examples of selective prosecution by the justice system. That reality has existed since the founding of the republic. Our justice system and the government itself are administered by human beings, all flawed and vulnerable. Our republican, representative democracy was constructed as a valiant attempt to emplace checks and balances to minimize transgressions, but those transgressions still occur to this day.

I join you in advocating for a STAR-type community service operations agency. I also agree that society has a duty to institute such intermediate services. Mental health intervention is not a task for law enforcement until the safety of the public domain is threatened. Sometimes, there is a very fine line.

The next exchange in this thread:

“Mistaking ‘law’ and ‘order’ for the same thing is a fallacy.
https://www.vox.com/mischiefs-of-faction/2018/7/9/17550116/trump-tweet-law-and-order

“STAR-type mental health intervention is shaping up to be a best practice. However, as you point out, some situations involve both mental health issues and the risk of violence. That is where de-escalation training shines. If the officer in the situation I experienced had responded from traditional police training, at least one person would have been injured or killed. That didn’t happen, and I appreciate that fact.”

With my response:

They are related, not separate. Ms. Smith offers an interesting argument. Yet, from my perspective, her rationale is the inverse of the far-right, deep-state-is-against-us drivel they continuously spew on all of us. I am somewhere in the middle. There is no debate that our justice system is imperfect, a work in progress at best.

That is how it seems to me. Results have been very positive from my perspective. I am glad the situation you witnessed turned out positively. We need many more of those positive outcomes. STAR-type community services are not a law enforcement matter; they are solely in the domain of the legislative function of government—Congress, legislatures, county commissioners, and city councils.

 

Thenauseating juxtaposition of the two staunchest strict constructionist, social conservative, associate justices on the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court being the least ethical of any person I have yet seen in government. Their righteous indignation rings hollow when we realize they have both accepted millions of dollars in benefits from wealthy conservative donors, and a U.S. senator is on trial for far less corruption. Alito is so bloody unethical that he throws his wife under the bus for flying at his home the United States flag upside down, a universal symbol of distress or surrender but in this case, an misappropriated symbol of the BIG LIE—“Stop the Steal.” Worse yet, they claim they have done nothing wrong and have shown absolutely no remorse or regret. Shame on them both.

 

A Word to the Wise: The election is six months away, and [the person who shall no longer be named] still leads in most (not all) national polls. The twice impeached, four times indicted, perpetrator of the BIG LIE, on trial for felonious crimes conman might still win the Electoral College vote in December despite the popular vote in November. We would be well advised to gird ourselves for another four years of boundless chaos, constitutional crises, and attempts to subvert the constitution that has sustained this once grand republic for 237 years. At the time, I thought the 60s and 70s were threatening the very fabric of the republic with the Vietnam War protests, the Cold War, civil rights protests, disrespect for the military, et al. But those days pale in comparison to the challenges we face today with Little Fingers, the MAGAts, the Freedom Caucus, et al. We must be prepared for what might happen.

 

Comments and contributions from Update no.1165:

Comment to the Blog:

“Little Fingers will need a very large jumpsuit if he keeps posting/talking.

“Judge Cannon would recuse herself from Little Fingers’ case or resign if she had ethical values.

“Marjorie Taylor Greene (MTG) has, probably unwittingly, finally forced the Republicans into bipartisan action. Your post points out that both parties have internal divisions.

“More importantly, several rule changes are overdue in Congress. The filibuster stands out and some of the committee chair rules are at least as important as MTG’s game.”

My response to the Blog:

Indeed, quite so . . . very large. He continues to probe the boundaries of the gag order. Today, he paraded out some of his sycophant acolytes in Congress, including the Speaker of the House, to circumvent the gag order for godsake. To me, all of these antics scream . . . guilty, guilty, guilty.

Agreed. Apparently, Cannon has no ethical values other than loyalty to ihr Lieber Anführer. The bill will come due.

I suspect MTG has many more unintended consequences of her insane machinations.

I would agree with that as well. I have long defended the filibuster as a means to induce cooperation and compromise. My enthusiasm for that task as been seriously and deeply corroded by the MAGAts. I am nearly to the point that the principle of the filibuster may well need to be sacrifices to break the contemporary insanity.

 . . . with follow-up comment:

“I could modify the filibuster to a continuous physical stand in the Senate Chamber. The current situation allows one Senator to submit a paper; that's not enough commitment. Various other procedural rules need to be modified or eliminated as well, such as the current method of getting rid of the Speaker of the House. A small minority ought not to be able to stop majority rule in ordinary circumstances.”

. . . my follow-up response:

I can accept that; the current rules are no longer acceptable. I will further argue the current rules are anti-democratic. The long and the short of it is, we need an overwhelming Democrat (or something other than Republican) Congress and White House to fix many of these issues. There is no form of democracy where a very small minority can stop the government’s operations. We see much more of just that as the former Republicans become progressively more desperate to retain their dwindling power, e.g., the MAGAt embrace of Christian nationalism (AKA white supremacy). Many portray the November election as a defense of democracy itself, and I could not agree more with those statements.

 

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                  :-)