ADVERTISEMENT

Hopefully this is the first step to purge Soros backed prosecutors...

Yes they do. Law enforcement cannot violate clearly established law, including constitutional law. Constitutional law is a part of training and certification.

As far as gun laws are concerned, enforcement of a clearly unconstitutional law could expose LE to Section 1983 claims. An example would be applying NY concealed carry laws in the face of the recent SCOTUS opinion about that.
You guys are going to end up going round & round on semantics on this one.

They don't get to DECIDE what's constitutional in the way the courts do that actually makes something constitutional or not. They do have to make decisions about whether what they're doing is constitutional. The rub, as you point is 1983 exposure for clearly unconstitutional laws. Like, pre-Dobbs, they couldn't arrest someone for having/performing an abortion at 6 weeks regardless of what laws were on the books. Sheriff's categorically deciding to not enforce red flag laws that haven't been decided on at the constitutional level is a different ball of wax altogether.
 
you really need to turn off MSNBC.

seriously, you would fire an employee immediately if they refused to execute their job - especially on hot topics analogous to castrating boys because social media makes them think it’s cool. Get a grip. DeSantis is no more an autocrat than Biden is a socialist. You sound like DANC.
If I was going to go full Bizzarro (the super villian) MSNBC/Danc I would be going mental on how immature and unprofessional his little announcement was. Invoking Soros as Warren's God/master handler and then painting a sordid picture of children being mutilated that this evil son of a bitch encourages.

I mean come on, do we really not see through this

How about you give me the f#$king names of the kids Ronny. Give me some legitimate source of the claims you're spouted. He won't because he can't, because he's f#$king lying.

But I didn't do that.

My overall point has nothing to do with if this attorney is a complete over the top political nutjob that isn't doing his job. He might be.

I just think it's f#$ked up to suspend someone when they haven't done anything yet. He hasn't denied the law or his oath. How can you nab him for something that hasn't happened?

So yeah, prove that he violated his oath and then we can talk.

Since no one can, this is just more political theater (I mean his publicist even preferaced the announcement that it was going to 'trigger the libs' so look forward to it)!
 
You guys are going to end up going round & round on semantics on this one.

They don't get to DECIDE what's constitutional in the way the courts do that actually makes something constitutional or not. They do have to make decisions about whether what they're doing is constitutional. The rub, as you point is 1983 exposure for clearly unconstitutional laws. Like, pre-Dobbs, they couldn't arrest someone for having/performing an abortion at 6 weeks regardless of what laws were on the books. Sheriff's categorically deciding to not enforce red flag laws that haven't been decided on at the constitutional level is a different ball of wax altogether.
That's fair and I will tell on myself, I didn't read the links so if that what was being discussed you have a fair point. I was thinking more along the lines of some of the things New York has been throwing around about how to get around the Supreme Court 2nd Amendment rulings.
 
That's fair and I will tell on myself, I didn't read the links so if that what was being discussed you have a fair point. I was thinking more along the lines of some of the things New York has been throwing around about how to get around the Supreme Court 2nd Amendment rulings.
Double confession, I only skimmed a few of them (most were within the last couple of years, not necessarily recently) but I think the one out of Washington or Oregon at least was about red flag laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUCrazy2
(I mean his publicist even prefaced the announcement that it was going to 'trigger the libs' so look forward to it)!
Great point. DeSantis is a culture warrior, he probably gets hard at the mere mention of the word "woke," and this is political grandstanding. He doesn't give a shit about Florida. As soon as he's reelected governor, his entire focus will shift to winning the presidency.
 
Great point. DeSantis is a culture warrior, he probably gets hard at the mere mention of the word "woke," and this is political grandstanding. He doesn't give a shit about Florida. As soon as he's reelected governor, his entire focus will shift to winning the presidency.
So he is a politician. Insert shocked face here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lucy01
You guys are going to end up going round & round on semantics on this one.

They don't get to DECIDE what's constitutional in the way the courts do that actually makes something constitutional or not. They do have to make decisions about whether what they're doing is constitutional. The rub, as you point is 1983 exposure for clearly unconstitutional laws. Like, pre-Dobbs, they couldn't arrest someone for having/performing an abortion at 6 weeks regardless of what laws were on the books. Sheriff's categorically deciding to not enforce red flag laws that haven't been decided on at the constitutional level is a different ball of wax altogether.
Which is why LE has qualified immunity which most if not all liberal Democrats want to eliminate or curtail.
 
Great point. DeSantis is a culture warrior, he probably gets hard at the mere mention of the word "woke," and this is political grandstanding. He doesn't give a shit about Florida. As soon as he's reelected governor, his entire focus will shift to winning the presidency.
I’m sorry … did you object to social justicey culture warrioring?

I need to know whether to guffaw at record level.

PS - I know of a prosecutor who says they wont enforce anti-assault rifle laws. Want to weigh in on what should be done to/with them/they/it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jet812
Has SCOTUS ruled on red flag laws? Or these laws specifically?
No.

Not all Red Flag laws are the same. Some may be constitutional and some not.

For example I think Colorado’s is unconstitutional because the only meaningful due process is post-deprivation and the burden of proof is put on the gun-owner to prove he or she isn’t a danger.
 
No.

Not all Red Flag laws are the same. Some may be constitutional and some not.

For example I think Colorado’s is unconstitutional because the only meaningful due process is post-deprivation and the burden of proof is put on the gun-owner to prove he or she isn’t a danger.
Thank you for your opinion Justice CO. Hoosier. But that's not your call and it's not the local sheriff's call. If local LEOs were that good at constitutional jurisprudence I wouldn't have argued so many suppression motions in the day.
 
IMO DeSantis is obviously checking all the popular GOP boxes in his run for the presidency.

The box being checked here is the cry to offset "Woke" prosecutors across the country who refuse to prosecute criminals and follow the laws as prescribed by duly elected legislators and other office holders.

Don't doubt the above happens, but is it as widespread as being depicted here at The Cooler and elsewhere ?
 
IMO DeSantis is obviously checking all the popular GOP boxes in his run for the presidency.

The box being checked here is the cry to offset "Woke" prosecutors across the country who refuse to prosecute criminals and follow the laws as prescribed by duly elected legislators and other office holders.

Don't doubt the above happens, but is it as widespread as being depicted here at The Cooler and elsewhere ?
"Tune in to Tucker to find out!"
 
I’m detecting mental puppetry

the-manchurian-candidate-raymond-shaw-kindest.gif
 
My understanding is that DeSantis didn't even have the decency (or balls) to pick up the phone and speak to this guy before suspending him.

DeSantis seems to prefer authoritarian rule. If he wants to lead Florida in that fashion, then positions like State Attorney need to be appointed rather than elected.

Warren may be the shittiest prosecutor who ever served, but he was elected (twice) to office. DeSantis just canceled the votes of the 370,000 people (53% of the vote) who voted for Warren in 2020.
Just to keep this balanced, I suspect suspending a judge/DA that refuses to uphold the law is a decision he has to make. Ronny is a scumbag, but this was manager101
 
  • Like
Reactions: CO. Hoosier
Thank you for your opinion Justice CO. Hoosier. But that's not your call and it's not the local sheriff's call. If local LEOs were that good at constitutional jurisprudence I wouldn't have argued so many suppression motions in the day.
Of course it wasn’t my call. But it was my obligation to give my opinion to LE and defend my opinion to those whose duty was to make the call.
 
DeSantis seems to prefer authoritarian rule. If he wants to lead Florida in that fashion, then positions like State Attorney need to be appointed rather than elected.
What does authoritarian mean to you. If DeSantis acted within the authority allowed him by Florida law, is he an authoritarian? I don’t think so. I think authoritarian means acting outside your authority. DeSantis is decisive, no doubt about that. I think many who are indecisive or hide behind committees, compliance, and group think would see a decisive person as authoritarian. I’ll take decisiveness.
 
Thank you for your opinion Justice CO. Hoosier. But that's not your call and it's not the local sheriff's call. If local LEOs were that good at constitutional jurisprudence I wouldn't have argued so many suppression motions in the day.
Local law enforcement officers constantly hear about people whom they arrested being let off the hook by prosecutors. This has been happening for as long as we have had police officers and prosecutors.

Prosecutors upon gathering all the evidence can sometimes determine the case against the arrested person is unlikely to hold up in court. For one thing, the arresting officer at the time of the arrest doesn't always have the full story concerning what occurred. Also witnesses and apparent victims can change their recollections, or refuse to cooperate upon rethinking events.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CO. Hoosier
What does authoritarian mean to you. If DeSantis acted within the authority allowed him by Florida law, is he an authoritarian? I don’t think so. I think authoritarian means acting outside your authority. DeSantis is decisive, no doubt about that. I think many who are indecisive or hide behind committees, compliance, and group think would see a decisive person as authoritarian. I’ll take decisiveness.
Are we dealing with political ambition or authoritarianism here ?

Here in Indiana the Governor hired outside council when he refused to honor the advice of the very Attorney General who was elected to advise him as to the laws of the state

In this case, unlike DeSantis, some of the public questions the political ambitions of the AG.
 
Local law enforcement officers constantly hear about people whom they arrested being let off the hook by prosecutors. This has been happening for as long as we have had police officers and prosecutors.

Prosecutors upon gathering all the evidence can sometimes determine the case against the arrested person is unlikely to hold up in court. For one thing, the arresting officer at the time of the arrest doesn't always have the full story concerning what occurred. Also witnesses and apparent victims can change their recollections, or refuse to cooperate upon rethinking events.
That’s all very true, and has gone on forever. But here is the difference. Prosecutors do exercise discretion on individual cases with individual defendants. That is what prosecutorial discretion is about. But when prosecutors refuse to prosecute whole classes of cases, often due to a previously held ideology, that is not prosecutorial discretion and in my view violates their oath of office and ethical duties.
 
I run an office with about 25 employees... if someone had a moral obligation to avoid following one of my policies... we would wave bye bye to them
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
What does authoritarian mean to you. If DeSantis acted within the authority allowed him by Florida law, is he an authoritarian? I don’t think so. I think authoritarian means acting outside your authority. DeSantis is decisive, no doubt about that. I think many who are indecisive or hide behind committees, compliance, and group think would see a decisive person as authoritarian. I’ll take decisiveness.
I think the board's biggest partisan hack should be cautious about accusing others of falling prey to "group think."




Your favorite autocrat wannabe is developing quite a resume.
 
Stupid. Which is something you are attracted to.
Hmmm ... the opposite of conservative is not liberal, the opposite of conservative is progressive. The opposite of liberal is authoritarian ..

Liberals are more inclined to be progressives, while authoritarians are more inclined towards conservatism.

Are you saying you're a liberal or the current pubs are? If not then ugh .. yea. The "stupid" you just threw may end up being a boomerang. vbg.
 
Last edited:
That’s all very true, and has gone on forever. But here is the difference. Prosecutors do exercise discretion on individual cases with individual defendants. That is what prosecutorial discretion is about. But when prosecutors refuse to prosecute whole classes of cases, often due to a previously held ideology, that is not prosecutorial discretion and in my view violates their oath of office and ethical duties.
Does this apply to federal prosecutors who do not go after pot shops and those who purchase from them?
 
Hmmm ... the opposite of conservative is not liberal, the opposite of conservative is progressive. The opposite of liberal is authoritarian ..

Liberals are more inclined to be progressives, while authoritarians are more inclined towards conservatism.

Are you saying you're a liberal or the current pubs are? If not then ugh .. yea. The "stupid" you just threw may end up being a boomerang. vbg.
I said nothing about political affiliations in my post. My ad hominem was tossed with specificity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T.M.P.
As long as the Sheriff's are adhering to what the Supreme Court has already ruled, then they are following the law. Democrat attempts to skirt that not withstanding.

The Florida constitution allows the governor to remove folks for not doing their job.

SECTION 7. Suspensions; filling office during suspensions.—
(a) By executive order stating the grounds and filed with the custodian of state records, the governor may suspend from office any state officer not subject to impeachment, any officer of the militia not in the active service of the United States, or any county officer, for malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, drunkenness, incompetence, permanent inability to perform official duties, or commission of a felony, and may fill the office by appointment for the period of suspension. The suspended officer may at any time before removal be reinstated by the governor.
(b) The senate may, in proceedings prescribed by law, remove from office or reinstate the suspended official and for such purpose the senate may be convened in special session by its president or by a majority of its membership.
(c) By order of the governor any elected municipal officer indicted for crime may be suspended from office until acquitted and the office filled by appointment for the period of suspension, not to extend beyond the term, unless these powers are vested elsewhere by law or the municipal charter.


People are getting tired of prosecutors selectively choosing what they will enforce. Waiting until the next election for a prosecutor to get voted out literally gets people killed. If this d-bag wanted to keep criminals out of jail, he should have been a defense attorney.

DeSantis 2024.
"People are getting tired of prosecutors selectively choosing what they will enforce. Waiting until the next election for a prosecutor to get voted out literally gets people killed. If this d-bag wanted to keep criminals out of jail, he should have been a defense attorney."

So now people who choose to have an abortion or transgender medical procedures are "criminals"? Because that is what DeSantis cited in his speech, and in his response Warren maintains that he is protecting the right of privacy which is guaranteed in the FL Constitution...

“Today’s political stunt is an illegal overreach that continues a dangerous pattern by Ron DeSantis of using his office to further his own political ambition. It spits in the face of the voters of Hillsborough County who have twice elected me to serve them, not Ron DeSantis.

"In our community, crime is low, our Constitutional rights—including the right to privacy—are being upheld, and the people have the right to elect their own leaders—not have them dictated by an aspiring presidential candidate who has shown time and again he feels accountable to no one.

"Just because the governor violates your rights, it doesn’t mean they don’t exist.”

"If the Governor feels he can do a better job, then he should run for State's Attorney, NOT President..."






If I was going to go full Bizzarro (the super villian) MSNBC/Danc I would be going mental on how immature and unprofessional his little announcement was. Invoking Soros as Warren's God/master handler and then painting a sordid picture of children being mutilated that this evil son of a bitch encourages.

I mean come on, do we really not see through this

How about you give me the f#$king names of the kids Ronny. Give me some legitimate source of the claims you're spouted. He won't because he can't, because he's f#$king lying.

But I didn't do that.

My overall point has nothing to do with if this attorney is a complete over the top political nutjob that isn't doing his job. He might be.

I just think it's f#$ked up to suspend someone when they haven't done anything yet. He hasn't denied the law or his oath. How can you nab him for something that hasn't happened?

So yeah, prove that he violated his oath and then we can talk.

Since no one can, this is just more political theater (I mean his publicist even preferaced the announcement that it was going to 'trigger the libs' so look forward to it)!
The issue of whether or not the laws DeSantis cited are constitutional or not is still unanswered. And that's a big part of Warren's response...

Meanwhile, when the CITIZENS of a particular jurisdiction are unhappy with a DA's conduct there is a specific remedy that is available to them...

 
  • Haha
Reactions: anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
I really liked the move because if you don't enforce laws then you are lawless.
So Missouri is "lawless"?


Not to mention, the laws in FL that DeSantis is accusing Warren of not enforcing are not settled law. Both sides are in the process of appealing adverse judicial rulings...

Overturned and then reinstated in July

Appeal/lawsuit submitted 3 days ago...

 
So Missouri is "lawless"?


Not to mention, the laws in FL that DeSantis is accusing Warren of not enforcing are not settled law. Both sides are in the process of appealing adverse judicial rulings...

Overturned and then reinstated in July

Appeal/lawsuit submitted 3 days ago...

Isn't this an issue about federal vs states rights? This kind of stuff gets batted around on a lot of different issues. Now I am in favor of this. I want there to be rigorous debate because this is what makes good laws. The real issue is what can the Federal government tell a state to do. In the Florida state it is completely a states issue. They have made laws and have someone who says he will not oblige the laws on the books. I call that lawlessness.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm ... the opposite of conservative is not liberal, the opposite of conservative is progressive. The opposite of liberal is authoritarian ..

Liberals are more inclined to be progressives, while authoritarians are more inclined towards conservatism.

Are you saying you're a liberal or the current pubs are? If not then ugh .. yea. The "stupid" you just threw may end up being a boomerang. vbg.
Authoritarian is not an ideology, it’s a method. Anybody from any point on the political spectrum can be an authoritarian.
 
I think the board's biggest partisan hack should be cautious about accusing others of falling prey to "group think."




Your favorite autocrat wannabe is developing quite a resume.
Anything there beyond a governor’s authority? What is your definition of authoritarian besides disagreeing with how the authority is exercised?
 
Does this apply to federal prosecutors who do not go after pot shops and those who purchase from them?
Excellent question. I don’t have a good answer. I don’t know if Wray was asked about that. My impression is that the feds don’t charge retail weed as a stand alone, but use it in connection with other more serious investigations.
 
You guys are going to end up going round & round on semantics on this one.

They don't get to DECIDE what's constitutional in the way the courts do that actually makes something constitutional or not. They do have to make decisions about whether what they're doing is constitutional. The rub, as you point is 1983 exposure for clearly unconstitutional laws. Like, pre-Dobbs, they couldn't arrest someone for having/performing an abortion at 6 weeks regardless of what laws were on the books. Sheriff's categorically deciding to not enforce red flag laws that haven't been decided on at the constitutional level is a different ball of wax altogether.
No semantics needed. COH is being disagreeable without actually disagreeing.

Obviously, state actors cannot enforce clearly unconstitutional laws, as in, laws that have been determined to be unconstitutional based on currently valid judicial precedent. On the other hand, state actors must do their duty to enforce valid state laws that have not been clearly declared unconstitutional, even if they genuinely believe they will be declared such.

In neither case we are talking about now, however, is that really what's going on. What we're really talking about are state actors - attorneys or sheriffs - who don't want to enforce certain laws over policy disagreements. They can dress it up all they want, but that's what we're really talking about. If those folks don't want to enforce those laws, they have one option: resign.
 
No semantics needed. COH is being disagreeable without actually disagreeing.

Obviously, state actors cannot enforce clearly unconstitutional laws, as in, laws that have been determined to be unconstitutional based on currently valid judicial precedent. On the other hand, state actors must do their duty to enforce valid state laws that have not been clearly declared unconstitutional, even if they genuinely believe they will be declared such.

In neither case we are talking about now, however, is that really what's going on. What we're really talking about are state actors - attorneys or sheriffs - who don't want to enforce certain laws over policy disagreements. They can dress it up all they want, but that's what we're really talking about. If those folks don't want to enforce those laws, they have one option: resign.
Too bad we can’t give half a like. Your first paragraph is a gross oversimplification. The second is spot on.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT