Texas passes border law: will it stand?

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s the gist of the state law:

Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill making Texas the first state in the union to give law enforcement officers the authority to arrest migrants who illegally enter the state. …

Senate Bill 4 from Special Session #4 makes illegal entry into Texas from a foreign country a criminal offense. The law is the latest attempt by the state to crack down on migrants illegally entering the state between ports of entry. By creating the offense of illegal reentry, offenders can be penalized with sentences of up to 20 years in prison. It also provides the mechanism to order an offender to return to the foreign nation from which they entered or attempted to enter this state. The law provides civil immunity and indemnification for local and state government officials, employees, and contractors for lawsuits resulting from enforcing these provisions.

The law is similar to a current federal statute under Title 8 of the United States Code 1325, which makes illegal entry into the United States a misdemeanor offense for a first-time offender and a felony for a second offense. Under the current administration, the federal statute is not pursued to any significant degree.

I’m not sure this law will be allowed to stand. SCOTUS has already ruled on something very similar regarding the state of Arizona, back in 2012. And although the makeup of the Supreme Court was different back then, there’s always the possibility of respect given to precedent. To refresh your memory, here’s a post I wrote about that Arizona decision. An excerpt:

The Court’s decision in Arizona v. US can be summarized as follows: the federal government is boss in immigration law. If the federal government wants to ignore its own federal immigration laws and refuse to enforce them, a state can’t pass its own laws that are more stringent than the federal ones on the books.

And from Scotusblog:

Although federal law already makes it illegal for someone to be in the country without proper authorization, Section 3 of the Arizona statute also makes it a state crime, subject to additional fines and possible imprisonment. The Court held that this provision was preempted and cannot be enforced. The Court held that Congress has left no room for states to regulate in this field, even to implement the federal prohibition.

However, you can see – if you follow that link – that the conservative justices dissented. To me that means that the decision of SCOTUS could go differently this time, if the Texas law were to be challenged by the Biden administration.

In their own words: an example of how Hamas embeds in hospitals

The New Neo Posted on by

It’s a war crime to take hostages. It’s a war crime to hide them in hospitals. It’s a war crime to conduct military operations and/or terrorist operations from a hospital. Hamas does this regularly, the world knows it, and the world – except for just a few countries – doesn’t care, or actually approves:

In addition, you’ve probably seen many videos or read many articles in which Palestinian doctors or nurses talk about the number and nature of casualties. Although there is no question there are indeed Palestinian civilian casualties, you cannot trust a single word the Palestinian doctors or nurses say as Hamas operatives or sympathizers, . We simply don’t know how many civilian casualties there are – and virtually all of them are the fault of Hamas purposely using the population of Gaza as human shields.

We have known this for decades. And yet the fiction goes on that it’s not happening, and no amount of evidence convinces many – most? – pro-Palestinians otherwise.

Fetterman 2.0 continues to go his own way

The New Neo Posted on by

And Fetterman’s own way is not the way the Democrats expected:

Isn’t this, though, a throwback to the days when Democrats wanted to protect American workers?

The abysmal ignorance of the young voter in the US

The New Neo Posted on by

Yesterday I wrote a post about some of the shocking results among respondents ages 18-24 in the recent Harvard Harris poll. But I missed a few viewpoints that group expressed in the poll that are especially revealing. See this chart and pay particular attention to the last three items on the list:

The ignorance involved in believing that “Israel is not a democracy” is bad enough, but it palls in comparison to “Hamas lets gay people live together openly.” Almost half of young people live in a fantasyland in which they believe that is so. The disconnect from reality is tremendously profound – and remember, these people are of voting age. They are not children. They are our future.

Will time and greater maturity change them? I’m not at all sure that will hold true for the most part for this group or its successors. Social media has become a powerful force in people’s lives and particularly for younger generations, and that is a huge part of the problem – along with our educational system, of course.

The young have gone way way off course: poll

The New Neo Posted on by

Very disturbing:

Here’s a link to the entire poll.

The opinions expressed by the younger generation reflect the fact that the young have been increasingly indoctrinated in post-modern Marxist theory of oppression uber alles. The figures are astonishing, and the contrast with the elderly is enormous. In this poll, you can see in stark relief the transformation of American thought. Nice work, Obama! Hope and change! Not that he’s solely to blame by any means. This started long before he became president.

Other results of interest:

According to the poll, the majority of Americans also think that Trump committed crimes for which he should be convicted: 59% (on page 21).

DeSantis is the strongest second choice to Trump for the GOP nomination, 31% to Haley’s 20% (on page 22). And surprisingly, at least to me, Kamala Harris is the strongest substitute for Biden at 28%, with Newsom at 7% (on page 23).

Two-thirds of voters think the GOP should hold up aid to Ukraine and Israel for a secure border (on page 38).

On page 46, 27% of respondents think the October 7 attack was justified by Palestinian grievances. And that’s where we have another awful linear progression of age-related opinions, because 60% of those between 18 and 24 said it was justified by Palestinian grievances. Say what you will about Boomers, above age 65 the figure agreeing with that was only 9%. But what is odd – at least, I think it’s odd – is that the answers on whether Hamas’ attack was genocidal are different, although the trend is the same. In that same age group of young 18s-24s, 66% think the attack was genocidal on Hamas’ part. Does that mean they think genocide against Jews is justified? Apparently.

Or they have no idea what Hamas is, or much of anything else. Probably the case. Indoctrination feeds on ignorance, and is helped along by social media.

We are in big big trouble with these generations. But of course you already knew that.

There’s plenty more in that poll that’s interesting as well. Most respondents hate identity politics on campus, anti-Semitism, and think the three university presidents who testified before Congress should resign. Again, the young are at odds with the rest of the country. For example, 79% of the youngest age group supports “There is an ideology that white people are oppressors and nonwhite people and people of certain groups have been oppressed and as a result should be favored today at universities and for employment. Do you support or oppose this ideology?” although 65% total oppose. 67% of the 18-24 crowd think Jews (not Israelis – Jews) are oppressors although 73% as a whole oppose. Is this because “Jews” are defined as “white”? And yet (on page 57) 65% of that 18-24 age group think Israel has a right to exist. What? Maybe they think it has a right to exist as a Palestinian state?

On page 64 you can see that 81% of respondents think that Hamas should not be allowed to run Gaza, and even among that 18-24 age group, 58% agree that Hamas should not be running Gaza. Among the over 65, however, it’s 95%. And on page 66, the question of whether Israel has a right to defend itself is asked, and 80% of that young group says yes. This is also typical of other groups, although a little lower than the over 55 and over 65 groups.. What gives? On page 67, 62% of those 18-24 seem aware that Hamas uses civilians as human shields, but on page 68 that same youngest group is evenly divided about who is provoking a humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

On page 69, 51% of those 18-24 say that Israel should be ended and given to the Palestinians; how that is supposed to be accomplished isn’t touched on. Perhaps that answers my earlier question, though, about the young approving of genocide if the ones being killed are Israelis or Jews. Only 4% of over 65 agree that Israel should be handed over to the wonderful and deserving Palestinians.

Decades of leftist and anti-Israel, as well as anti-Jew, indoctrination in our educational system have borne poisonous fruit. I’m not at all sure you’d have gotten higher figures of Jew-hatred from polls of college students in Nazi Germany.

Qatar and the Empire State Building

The New Neo Posted on by

Wow. Just wow.

This:

The iconic New York landmark announced on X Sunday: “Tonight from midnight until sunrise, we will shine in burgundy and white to celebrate Qatar National Day.” Back in 2016, Qatar shelled out $622 million to buy 9.9 percent of the Empire State Building, and so if the building’s managers wants to honor one their principal shareholders, that’s their business. The timing in this case, however, is particularly ghastly, and raises questions about the propriety of having not-quite-friendly states owning a piece of American landmarks.

Qatar is a supposed ally – but one which supports Hamas monetarily and provides its leaders safe haven.

Israel addresses the UN – plus, all you never wanted to know about UNRWA

The New Neo Posted on by

Gilad Erdan tells the UN General Assembly members how morally bankrupt they are, although he realizes the vast vast majority of the representatives there – and their governments – could not care less. One of the things I find most interesting about this speech is his tone. He doesn’t sound like a diplomat, or a politician, or any of the usual speech-makers. He sounds like a person talking to other people:

The UN has been highly instrumental in nurturing Jew-hatred among the Palestinians. The following video is from the Jerusalem Center. It’s a highly informative discussion that describes the pernicious role that UNRWA has played in Gaza. Recall, as you watch it, that President Trump cut US UNRWA funding back in 2018, and that Biden restored most of it early in his term. Just another fabulous accomplishment of the Biden administration. The reason the Biden administration gave for doing this:

Mr Biden wants to “restore credible engagement” by the Palestinians in long-stalled peace talks with Israel.

How’d that work out for ya, Joe?

I think Trump should point all of this out in his 2024 campaign.

Anyway, here’s the video (I again suggest going to “settings” and listening at a faster speed):

Confronting a coyote

The New Neo Posted on by

During my trip out west, I tried to keep up with my walking regimen. On one particular leg of the journey, I was in a Los Angeles suburb, walking along a well-traveled path near homes. There were some plantings on a small hill along the path, and one day as I walked I heard some loud rustling in the low bushes.

I looked up and saw a large coyote staring at me, maybe ten to fifteen feet away. I’ve seen coyotes in LA suburbs before, most prominently one night around 2 AM years ago when my pet dog started barking and scratching at the front door, wanting to go out onto the street. The door had a little window in it, and I looked out to see an entire coyote pack sauntering up the road.

Needless to say, I didn’t let my 25-pound dog out.

But the other day I was very surprised to see this one lone animal at around 2 PM rather than 2 AM. We stared at each other for what seemed a long time, while I tried to remember instructions for what to do. Should I yell? Beat my chest? I knew better than to run, but what I decided to do was simply walk away.

Luckily, the coyote was only mildly interested in me. But it was a reminder that even in LA suburbia, the wild world isn’t so far away.

DC jury sets absurdly high punitive damages for Giuliani in defamation suit

The New Neo Posted on by

They are trying their best to destroy him. Here’s the latest effort:

A jury comprising eight Washington, D.C., residents awarded ex-Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss $148,169,000 in their defamation suit against Rudy Giuliani on Friday.

More here:

There was an audible gasp in the courtroom when the jury foreperson read aloud the $75 million award in punitive damages for the women. Moss and Freeman were each awarded another roughly $36 million in other damages.

Giuliani didn’t appear to show any emotion as the verdict was read after about 10 hours of deliberations. Moss and Freeman hugged their attorneys after the jury left the courtroom and didn’t look at Giuliani as he left with his lawyer.

Giuliani told reporters outside Washington’s federal courthouse that he will appeal, saying the “absurdity of the number merely underscores the absurdity of the entire proceeding.”

“It will be reversed so quickly it will make your head spin, and the absurd number that just came in will help that actually,” he said.

Why DC for this particular case? You know why – DC juries will be as Draconian as possible. Plus, if the suit had occurred in Georgia, such an award would not have happened:

A $250,000 cap in punitive damages is constitutional, the Georgia Supreme Court has confirmed, upholding the trial court’s decision to substantially reduce a $50 million verdict to $250,000. Taylor v. Devereux Found., Inc., Nos. S22A1060, S22X1061, 2023 Ga. LEXIS 63 (Mar. 15, 2023).

Additionally, the Court ruled that the cap imposed by the law did not infringe on the right to a fair trial by jury, separation of powers, or the guarantee of equal protection.

Like many states, Georgia imposes a statutory cap on punitive damages. The cap limits punitive damages to a specific dollar amount of $250,000. There are some limited exceptions to this cap, however. For example, in cases of product liability, when the defendant acted with the specific intent to harm, or when the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the $250,000 cap does not apply.

In addition, in the Giuliani case, the harm to the plaintiffs was from death threats, although no one had attacked the women and Giuliani did not threaten them or tell people to do so.

Giuliani also faces criminal charges in the Georgia case against Trump.

SCOTUS has ruled previously on limits to punitive damages, but usually the guidelines involve punitive damages as a multiple of compensatory damages. In the Giuliani defamation case, the compensatory damages are also hugely out of whack already, so I believe the huge punitive award wouldn’t violate the letter of those previous rulings, although it might violate the spirit. Many of these cases are against large companies rather than private individuals.

Giuliani doesn’t have that kind of money, so he could go into bankruptcy, but apparently he’d always be liable because bankruptcy wouldn’t cancel the debt (see the Alex Jones case – which also had the element of Jones’ defamatory statements being held to have been “willful and malicious” with “intent to harm.”)

Here’s more background on the case, which has been complicated. The present jury trial was only about compensation because the judge had previously ruled against Giuliani on the merits, but for what I consider an unusual reason related to the lawfare against Giuliani and his reaction to it:

A federal judge has determined that Rudy Giuliani has lost a defamation lawsuit from two Georgia election workers against him after he failed to provide information sought in subpoenas. …

In court in recent weeks, Giuliani said he could no longer contest that he made false and defamatory statements about Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss …

Giuliani said he struggled to maintain his own access to his electronic records – partly because of the cost – and didn’t adequately respond to subpoenas for information from Moss and Freeman as the case moved forward.

Among other things, Giuliani has been required to pay not only his own attorney’s fees but also those of the plaintiffs. What’s more:

Giuliani has been struggling financially, buried under 2020 election legal proceedings, a new criminal case against him in Georgia related to efforts to overturn the election and other matters. …

Ted Goodman, a political adviser to Giuliani, said in a statement that Howell’s decision was “a prime example of the weaponization of our justice system, where the process is the punishment.” Goodman added that Giuliani was “wrongly accused” of failing to preserve his own records and that he wanted Howell’s decision to be reversed. …

Giuliani had claimed that the FBI seizure of his electronic devices years ago had complicated his ability to access his records and that he had struggled under pricey legal fees. But Howell said he could have taken steps at an earlier point to keep his records in case litigation arose in the future.

The judge also noted that while Giuliani complained to the court that he was buried in litigation costs, he was able to get Trump’s reimbursement for his electronic legal debts, listed his Manhattan co-op apartment for $6.5 million and traveled on a private plane to report to jail for processing in Fulton County, Georgia, last week.

Doesn’t putting one’s residence up for sale indicate the need to raise money?

That said, I think Giuliani was very unwise to claim what he did about these workers without ironclad proof. I understand having suspicions, but he should have known better than to make such strong and detailed accusations. That doesn’t mean that this award amount is anywhere near correct, though. It is not. Will it stand? I certainly hope not.

[NOTE: I haven’t seen many bloggers on the right covering this. I’m not sure why that is.]