Post sir sherard. Thank you counsel, the case is submitted. After the oral argument, attorney spoke about the case on the Supreme Court steps. Leading off with paul clement, representing the new york state rifle and pistol association. My name is paul clement represented the petitioners in the Supreme Court today. I dont know if there will be questions from anybody but i wanted to quickly say that we are very gratified that the Supreme Court heard the arguments in todays case. This is a very important case. My clients have been litigating this case for over five years theyve been represented by a great team that goes well beyond me. Brian stapleton has been representing them from the very beginning of this litigation. The reason they filed this lawsuit five years ago was to try to vindicate their rights under the Second Amendment. Up until the point that the Supreme Court granted certiorari in this case, the city of new york had resisted their efforts to vindicate their rights in every
Beginning of this litigation. The reason they filed this lawsuit five years ago was to try to vindicate their rights under the Second Amendment. Up until the point that the Supreme Court granted certiorari in this case, the city of new york had resisted their efforts to vindicate their rights in every turn and only when the Supreme Court granted the certiorari petition in this case did the city start to take efforts to try to recognize their rights. The court asked a lot of questions today about those continuing efforts by the city to try to make this case go away but they also asked very important questions about the merits that made clear that this is part and parcel of the kind of regulations that have no basis in text history or tradition and should not be upheld consistent with the Second Amendment so we are very hopeful that the court will decide this case on the merits and in favor of the petitioners but in all that we are very gratified we had our day in court to vindicate thes
Teams prior claim that he cant be prosecuted even if he assassinated, killed, assassinated his political rivals. Could a president who ordered s. E. A. L. Team six to assassinate a political rival, who was not impeached, would he be subject to criminal prosecution. If he were impeached and convicted first so your answer is no. Today trumps lawyers argued, quote, a former president enjoys absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for his official acts. They also tried to argue that Holding President accountable for his crimes would somehow cripple the office. Quote, a denial of criminal immunity would incapacitate every future president with De Facto Black Mail and extorsion. The key to trumps argument is his claim that trying to overturn the election was part of his official Amitriptyline Acts as president , a claim that is absolute nonsense. Trumps filing comparing january 6th to clintons airstrikes in the middle east, bushs search for weapons of mass destruction and even president
The bad thing about it is we had the police at our house the night before. We also had the team that was in place here in san berd i o coaching us and telling us what they had available to us, which was they wouldnt come out to see us because they were staffed with the amount of people needed. They were offering to talk to my son on the other phone to try to talk him out of his psychosis, which is ridiculous. Wouldnt happen. So the next best thing is they offered to send a Police Officer to our home. What the Police Officer did, which was a young layman officer with with no still capable of manipulation answered his question, no. He wouldnt hurt himself or anybody else. Six hours later, he woke up with a bat and a knife in his hand and attempted to kill me in my bed as i slept. Host anthony, first of all, how old is your son caller he just turned 19. His name is aaron. I talked about him with Duncan Murphy friend. So, i am pretty sure you are familiar with my story. My son is still in
Here to talk about the justice for all march in d. C. What is the message behind the march . Guest we want the congress and the National Administration to jur with the state grand ies that seem to have a real conflict of interest when it comes to investigating and moving forward with Law Enforcement. The recent grand jury decision not to move forward it to trial in ferguson, missouri and Staten Island, new york, represents over and over are again occurrences when we engage questioningorcement fatal shootings or brutality. Todays march will be led by the mother and father of Michael Brown junior from ferguson. The wife and mother of eric of theand the mother 12yearold killed by police in cleveland, ohio. Parents and the. Amily members there his domestic partner and child will be there. These are the people who have seekdirectly hurt and only a public trial so that evidence can be put out when there is adversarial representation, not enclosed proceedings were a works dailyutor with these