GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Powered by Genesis

FBI Raid on Lawmaker’s Office Legal

July 10, 2006 by Average Gay Joe

From the Associated Press:

An FBI raid on a Louisiana congressman’s Capitol Hill office was legal, a federal judge ruled Monday.

Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan said members of Congress are not above the law. He rejected requests from lawmakers and Democratic Rep. William Jefferson to return material seized by the FBI in a May 20-21 search of Jefferson’s office.

In a 28-page opinion, Hogan dismissed arguments that the first-ever raid on a congressman’s office violated the Constitution’s protections against intimidation of elected officials.

Jefferson’s theory of legislative privilege “would have the effect of converting every congressional office into a taxpayer-subsidized sanctuary for crime,” the judge said…

Thank you, Judge Hogan.  As I said on this blog back in June, Congress’ power grab in seeking such an unprecedented privilege was reckless and dangerous.  At least one judge has now shot this down and I personally believe the Appeals Court will do likewise.  Score one for the People.

Filed Under: Constitutional Issues, General

Comments

  1. Patrick (Gryph) says

    July 10, 2006 at 7:08 pm - July 10, 2006

    At least one judge has now shot this done and personally I believe so will the Appeals Court. Score one for the People.

    Darn those despot Judicial Activists!

  2. V the K says

    July 11, 2006 at 8:45 am - July 11, 2006

    It’s always funny when stupid people use words they don’t understand, like “Judicial Activism.”

  3. rightwingprof says

    July 11, 2006 at 9:04 am - July 11, 2006

    Not that it will do any good, but here is an example of what is, and is not, judicial activism.

  4. Br. Katana of Reasoned Discussion says

    July 11, 2006 at 10:54 am - July 11, 2006

    Rightwingprof: I read the site you linked & I don’t understand any better “what is, and is not, judicial activism.” To me, it still sounds like Judicial Activism is basically any ruling a person (polictically right, left, or otherwise) disagrees with.

    Is there an example of a ruling you disagree but would not call “Judicial Activism?”

  5. Br. Katana of Reasoned Discussion says

    July 11, 2006 at 11:03 am - July 11, 2006

    BTW: It wasn’t just the Democrats, the Speaker of the House was supporting the idea, too.

    This ruling is fine with me because it’s like when the courts decided against Nixon to prove that the President wasn’t above the law. Personally, raids like this don’t seem likely to become a commonplace occurance in the near future.

  6. raj says

    July 13, 2006 at 9:29 am - July 13, 2006

    #6 Br. Katana of Reasoned Discussion — July 11, 2006 @ 10:54 am – July 11, 2006

    Rightwingprof: I read the site you linked & I don’t understand any better “what is, and is not, judicial activism.” To me, it still sounds like Judicial Activism is basically any ruling a person (polictically right, left, or otherwise) disagrees with.

    Your last point is basically correct. Recognize, though, that RightWingProf was merely advertising his web site.

  7. YTUYT says

    July 14, 2006 at 2:43 pm - July 14, 2006

    HIIHIHIH

Categories

Archives