Did you ever notice …
… how much of the news involves the law? I’ve noticed that a lot lately, including today.
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
… how much of the news involves the law? I’ve noticed that a lot lately, including today.
This article mostly rehashed what neo already posted about the recent SCOTUS decision Trump v. CASA. But it’s worth a read, and reiterates the point about an “imperial judiciary.”
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/07/justice_amy_coney_barrett_s_thunderclap_heard_around_the_republic.html
Justice Jackson would do well to heed her own admonition: ‘[E]veryone, from the President on down, is bound by law.’ … That goes for judges too.
Justice Jackson decries an imperial Executive while embracing an imperial Judiciary.
Of course the news covers a lot of legal issues because those issues so interfere with and impact our lives.
…and, almost all law news involves Trump’s attempts to do the right thing.
Spoke too soon
https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1940481205306335629?
A bit off topic, but it is about the law and lawyers. I just finished up an historical novel about Cicero, by Robert Harris. If that sort of thing appeals to you I highly recommend. Cicero rejected multiple attempts by both Julius Cesar and Octavian to join them in their battles to overthrow the Republic. It almost certainly would have saved his life, and he knew it. So evidently lawyering can be an honorable profession.
There was a revolutionary of sorts catiline who cicero pronounced himself against some classists think he got the wrong deal this was in the last era of the republic
A lot of illegal use of the Law, by Lawyers
I may be emotional, or perhaps naive on this … But, about this:
“Justice Jackson would do well to heed her own admonition:
‘[E]veryone, from the President on down, is bound by law.’ … That goes for judges too.”
Really????
I do not see how judges or justices are bound by any law.
With lifelong tenure and NO meaningful accountability, they are free to rule by whim and/or politics.
…
Recent years have certainly proven that.
What am I missing?
Lawfare and the grotesque Democratic Party weaponization of the DOJ, LE and intelligence agencies are not exactly new, though….
“Ratcliffe’s scathing review finds John Brennan pushed to include Steele Dossier in 2016 assessment”—
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/ratcliffes-scathing-review-finds-john-brennan-pushed-include-steele
He sounded familiar
https://j6patriotnews.com/dc-judges-series-judge-randolph-moss
Even going back to the russia gate scam
Puts me in mind of the old story of the lawyer who was poor as a churchmouse until another moved into town and they both got rich. Think about it.
Puts me in mind of the old story of the lawyer who was poor as a churchmouse until another moved into town and they both got rich. Think about it.
==
I guess in that town nobody buys or sells real estate, writes a will, drives drunk, or registers a business.
Cicero was not exactly what we would call a lawyer. But it so happened that he lived in a time when the ‘logic of legality’ was giving way to the ‘logic of force’. What mattered was not what the law said, but what the man in command of the victorious mob, or army, said.
Pompey is reported to have said, “Will you never cease to prate of laws to those of us who carry swords?” Or words to that effect, at about that time.
We’re not to that point yet, and maybe we can still avoid it.
Still, though people sometimes casually compare the modern USA and modern West to the Roman Empire, the real parallels appear when you study the last century BC and the last years of the Roman Republic.
When I read about “the law,” I am reminded of Bobby Fuller’s hit. Bobby Fuller: I Fought the Law. (And the—law won.) Ironically, not long after this song became a hit, Bobby Fuller was found dead in an automobile. Six decades later, the law has not solved the mystery of his death.
HC68
I am not as knowledgeable about Roman history as my elementary-age interest in Rome would have predicted, but I have recently read that in the late Republic, lawfare was used against those who had left office–also against Caesar. And that this lawfare was a factor in the death of the Republic.
And that the lawfare of the late Republic is one reason why some compare the late Republic to the USA of recent years. I need to read up.
I agree with HC68 largely on the value of studying the late Roman republic. I’m currently reading the bio of Augustus (again). Yes, that whole period is redolent of similarities. There are some things that stand out as differences: for one, there is, even at this juncture, more than one real power center in this… modern near-empire?/quasi-semi-empire? whatever this is that we have now. Instead of Rome as the center of apparently pretty much everything, there are still some other cities with a certain heft: L. A., New York.
As to the main topic about the prevalence of law in the news: I would say on the one hand it’s the heavy weight of law in all our lives generally, but also maybe that lawyers are this society’s priestly class, in my view. They have their holy writ, their rituals, their mysterious-sounding jargon, and so on. And they have the type of mystique that comes with slinging a lot of money around, by which I mean less the surface phenomena of rich living in the case of any individual attorney and more the fact that anything that we have to pay a lot of money for a specially educated individual to “help” us with is necessarily going to have a lot of the hoi polloi thinking of it as a prestigious activity – if it weren’t, the lawyers’ fees wouldn’t be so high.
Stephen saylor is who i was referring to, catiline was the subtext of that terrible coppola film he had been mulling for 30. Years megalopolis