Holscher's Hub: The Courthouse Deer

Holscher's Hub: The Courthouse Deer:  

The Courthouse Deer

 

Lex Anteinternet: Amy Coney Barrett as a Mirror

Lex Anteinternet: Amy Coney Barrett as a Mirror: 

Amy Coney Barrett as a Mirror

Judge Laurence Silberman, for whom Barrett first clerked after law school, swearing her in at her investiture for the Seventh Circuit.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amy_Coney_Barrett#/media/File:20180223_185543_NDD_5533.jpg  CC BY-SA 4.0view termsFile:20180223 185543 NDD 5533.jpg Created: 23 February 2018

Yesterday we published this item about long term demographic trends in the U.S.

The Conservative Tide?

Um, correction, we published those about long term demographic trends on Earth, and how that will, and already is, impacting culture..

Following that news, Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed to the United States Supreme Court.

This is interesting in the context of itself, as well as the context of what we were writing about.  Barrett is, in some ways, a mirror on where we are now, and where we're going.

She's also a mirror on how we view democracy itself, at an existential level.  Are we for it, or against it?

Barrett's nomination angered and upset the old order liberal establishment.  She appeared to be what liberals have really feared over the years but never had to really fully face, at least since the death of Scalia.  A legal genius who is a textualist.  And here, in a Twitter exchange between two U.S. Senators, who can see the upset distilled and refined.

First, Senator Ed Markey, a semi freshman Senator (he started finishing John Kerry's term in 2013 before being elected to his own first full term and had a long stint in Congress) from Massachusetts and then the reply from Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse.

Markey, who made it to Congress for his freshman at age 67 (he's now in his 70s) although he did have a prior term as a Congressman from Massachusetts from 1976 until 2013.

Ed Markey@SenMarkeyOriginalism is racist. Originalism is sexist. Originalism is homophobic. Originalism is just a fancy word for discrimination.1:22 PM · Oct 26, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

Sasse, on his second term and still in his forties.

Senator Ben Sasse@SenSasseReplying to u/SenSasseActually, “originalism” is another way of saying that texts and words have meaning. That's not to claim that all texts and words from 1789 were correct – but that when they need to be changed, they should be changed by elected legislators, not unelected judges.4:55 PM · Oct 26, 2020·Twitter Web App

First of all, it must be stated that Markey' statement is so blisteringly ignorant that it should disqualify him from voting for dog catcher.  This is dumb beyond belief.  It's not only partisan, it's just outright stupid.  The fact that Markey has a law degree from the Boston College of Law is proof, as if any is needed, that you really don't need to know anything about anything in order to graduate from law school.

You also apparently don't need to know the Constitution or care about the truth of it.  Markey has been in Congress since 2013

It also shows that the oath of office that Senators take is regarded as a complete joke by some. The oath states:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God. 

I know that it's hoping against hope, but there should be a point at which the violation of your oath of office has an implication, with that properly being that the Senate should refuse to continue to seat you.  You're an oath breaker in your office.  You should go. 

Sasse isn't a lawyer, and is a PhD, so there's apparently some hope for other disciplines yet remaining.

Of interest, Markey, who joined the National Guard while in college, which he says wasn't to avoid service in Vietnam, and who made it to Specialist E4 after five years of National Guard service, was born in 1946.  Sasse in 1972.  Markey is a reliably left wing politician who just made it to the US Senate, after a long career in the House. Sasse is a very independent Republican who is on his second term.*

In other words, here we see the prefect example of what we wrote about yesterday.  An aged, and now nearly irrelevant, East Coast Boomer politician is stating absolute idiocies about the Constitution, and being corrected by a post boomer respected, and more experienced at the Senatorial level, Mid American politician.

In the reaction to Barrett we're seeing a lot of this, although savvy politicians of all generations avoided it.  Long term political survivor, for example, Dianne Feinstein just flat out didn't go there, and for good reason.  She's taking a lot of whiny heat for her decision not to, but given her long history in politics, she's adept at reading the Washington tea leaves and avoided committing forced errors in the second Barrett confirmation she participated in.

The real complaint on the left, to the extent they've been able to express it, is expressed in terms of "she's going to take away our rights", ignoring the fact that it takes five Supreme Court justices to do anything and if Barrett is reliably a textualist there's only one other actually on the Court.  But beyond that, what the real fear is that the Justices will stop making stuff up and send things back to the states to be voted on.

That fear is based on something we all know to be true. The Constitution doesn't cover all that much.  If it isn't in there, it really is left up to the states.  Liberals fear that the American people simply aren't as liberal as they are.  So they don't want these things voted on.  Its not the Courts taking away their rights that they fear, but rather a declaration that they aren't rights and therefore they aren't protected by the Constitution, and are free for legislative address.  

Liberals have real reason to fear that, to be sure, because the evidence is pretty good a lot of state legislatures would in fact not recognize a lot of things that the Supreme Court has said are rights over the years.  But that's the thing about democracy.  People don't always see things the same way you do.

Indeed, they often don't.

Indeed, the recognition of this by humorist and social commentator Garrison Keillor, who is openly left wing also brought a firestorm of criticism from his own fellow travelers.  Keillor made a comment about some things just not worth ripping the country apart for anymore, and included abortion among them, and then was subject to aggressively negative comments.  Keillor's suggestion was that the country could tolerate the states deciding their own way.   That brought the classic argument used when somebody can't think of something to argue about from some on the left, which was to turn on accusations that Keillor acted inappropriately to women on his staff.**

Garrison Keillor was accused of bullying and humiliating women on his staff and no one should be shocked that he continues to be anti-women. . . 

Lyz Lenz, former columnist for the Cedar Rapids Gazette. 

I don't know the details of the arguments about Keillor, but that reply is just weird.  What Keillor stated isn't anti woman, and what we'll note below here should be obvious, Barrett is a woman.

Anyhow, at the same time, this also means that Liberals have become acclimated to an elitist view of government over the years, with the Supreme Court serving as a Platonic council of elders.  They liked the idea of the wise, symbolized by the late Justice Ginsburg, declaring things for the less benighted.  

The problem with that is that if you accept it, you have to accept it Soviet style.  I.e., if the Politburo says one day that we're friends of the Third Reich, we are, and if later it says they're our enemy, they are. No asking questions.

So you really can't ask a legislative body to appoint only benighted elders who are enemies of legislators. That makes no sense.

Indeed, in order for the Court to really work the way the left would have it work, the Court would have to be appointed by itself, something nobody is really willing to do.

Which is in part why court packing, as backed by AOC, is such a dumb idea.  Some upset Democrats would have the next Senate pack the Court.  This presumes that the next Senate will be Democratic, which is looking increasingly unlikely late in the election, but if that comes to pass, some future Republican Senate would just pack it more.  There's be no reason not to, once that was established, and at that point the Court would be nothing more than an arm of the national legislature, the very thing the left wing fears the most.  

Indeed, if it's packed, why not paced, why not pack it with jurisprudential conservatives, that would approach the law the same way that judicial liberals do.  The results of that would be to rule from the bench in a way that conservatives have never done in the U.S., but which there could easily be found people who would do.  Right now, a liberal focus is on abortion, for example.  Judicial conservatives might, at the very most, say that there's no right protecting it to be found in the Constitution, which is actually quite unlikely at this point, and send it back to the states.  But jurisprudential conservatives could take the same approach to the law that judicial liberals have and find that abortion is contrary to the natural law and therefore contrary and hence illegal due to factors that underlie the Constitution and which are beyond it.  People like AOC who would pack the Court, if they have any intellectual honesty, which is doubtful as it would require reasoning beyond politics, would have to accept that even if they are in the highly liberal camp.

In Ginsburgh, Barrett, Sasse, and Markey, we have the reflection of what we noted  yesterday. Ginsburg was a symbol of her times, and a hero of them for legitimate reasons. But those times have passed.  The geriatric nature of the national government makes this something that, for those in it, that is hard to appreciate, and the unusual domination of a single generation, the Baby Boomers, in the culture of the Western World further obfuscated it.  But the oldest departing recent Supreme Court justices, Kennedy and Ginsburg, were well past their eras when the departed the bench, one voluntarily and one through death.

In her life, Ginsburg very much reflected her times. She was a pioneer in the law and in the life of women at the time, becoming a lawyer when it was hard just for women to enter the profession, and raising two children while having a career, the oldest of which, also a lawyer, is now 65 years old herself.  She was a political liberal in a liberal era, and lead a pioneering life.

Barrett, in her 40s, is by contrast younger than both of Justice Ginsburg's children and is a pioneer in her own right, but the kind that many of the left don't care for and fear, just as in the 70s Ginsburg was the same for some on the right.  Also a career women, she is the mother of a large family of seven, for which it is always noted that two were adopted.*** She's outwardly religiously devout where as it seems Ginsburg was secular, at least to appearances.  And Ginsburg quietly endorsed an activist judicial approach which accepted, in essence, that the populace would not go where it needed to on its own and had to be lead there, while Barrett takes the approach that the populace goes where it goes, and should be restrained only where it clearly has been structurally provided that it can't go there.

That this would create fights on the left is telling.  It makes sense that justices like Ginsburg were opposed on the right, as they accepted imposing changes from above and irrespective of democratic feelings on them.  It would seem that everyone would be more tolerant of the concept of imposing changes from below, except for the basic distrust that most people don't want to go some places.

But the acceptance of the imposition of change on the left is mostly because the right has never attempted that in the United States.  It most definitely has in other countries.  Indeed, while its often argued by some that the American Revolution was a "conservative revolution", the disproof of that is that we've never really had one.  Other countries most definitely have had conservative revolutions which imposed conservative ideals from the top.  The Spanish Civil War was a species of conservative revolution in its impact, for example.  It could be likewise argued that Petain's premiership from 1940 to 1945 in France likewise was.

This is not to argue that those are really fully analogous examples, and certainly not admirable ones.  Franco and Petain were definitely anti democratic, where as the American conservatives most definitely are pro democratic.  As noted, it's ironically the American left that tends to be somewhat anti democratic with that impulse existing even somewhat in the mainstream, although recently the hard alt right has flirted with being anti democratic as well.  Rather, the point is American conservatism has always limited its efforts to argument, in the mainstream.****Indeed, American conservatives have not argued for jurisprudentially conservative justices at any point, and don't even seem to know what that would mean.

So the question now becomes, in the short term, how society might deal with increased legislative activity being licensed and licensed at the local level, something that reverses a 90 year trend.  And the added question is how American liberalism, which even in conservative administrations has basically been either been in the driver's seat or right besides the driver with a hand on the wheel, reacts when this is no longer true.  Conservatives in most places are used to the idea of being "strangers in a strange land", i.e., at least somewhat outside of their own societies.  Liberals are not.

Added to that we're just beginning to see the very first reactions of the Cosmo Girl meeting the Twitter Girl.  That may seem to be superficial, but seeing what's gong on out there shows its not.  One hip, young, cool female Twitter figure defines herself as:

real. raw. bold. brave. Marian devotion to apocalyptic proportions. in the pursuit of corn juice.

No hip, cool, Boomer, when young, or ever, defined herself that way.

Changings of the guard are only smooth transitions in organizations that are designed for that.  Cultures, don't design for that.  And as we've noted before, cultures are sticky, yet plastic.  The times, turly, are a changin'

___________________________________________________________________________________

*Markey's South Boston unit contained at least two other then young future notable political figures and his two brothers.  Service in the Guard and Reserve was an honorable Vietnam War option and I'm not claiming the opposite.

**One of the weird ironies of the Me Too movement is that men should have been acting like Christian gentlemen, even though the movement has been grounded in a camp and industry that declared its animosity towards Christian values eons ago.  

This doesn't endorse male wolfish behavior, but so far none of the real backers of the movement have been able to state why men shouldn't act the way that they've been complaining about, even though everyone knows why they shouldn't.  Be that as it may, a society that was raised on a diet of the evolved products of Playboy and Cosmopolitan has taught the very horrific lessons that brought about the behavior now complained of.  In seeking to revive the old standard, in the guise of it being the new woke one, some argument has to be created to back it.  Just "you shouldn't" is an anemic argument and fails on its face.  Nobody makes the argument, however, as "you shouldn't" as it wrong, and its wrong because. . . well nobody wants to go there and discuss what else might be wrong.

***She was oddly accused of racism for adopting orphans from Haiti and criticized simply for having a large family, the latter an example of prejudice of varying types, some religious, but some generational.  The new woman, as viewed from the 60s and 70s, isn't supposed to have a large family.  The problem is, that some of the younger ones now do, as we noted yesterday.

****In the American South, however, this isn't always true by any means.  And there's no denying that Southern conservatism backed racism and went beyond arguments to back it.

“Like playing with Michael Jordan”: Three former Ginsburg clerks talk about what it was like working for the justice

“Like playing with Michael Jordan”: Three former Ginsburg clerks talk about what it was like working for the justice

Lex Anteinternet: The First Supreme Court. Who were they, and how ma...

Lex Anteinternet: The First Supreme Court. Who were they, and how ma...: There were only six.  That number was set by the 1789 act establishing the Court. The original Supreme Court heard very very few cases and m...

Lex Anteinternet: Notes On Nominations. Replacing Justice Ginsburg

Lex Anteinternet: Notes On Nominations. Replacing Justice Ginsburg: As we noted two days ago in an entry here, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away this week. Ruth Bader Ginsberg. 1933-2020 Ginsburg was a ...

Lex Anteinternet: Ruth Bader Ginsberg. 1933-2020

Lex Anteinternet: Ruth Bader Ginsberg. 1933-2020:

Ruth Bader Ginsberg. 1933-2020

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away today, September 18, 2020.

In a year of seemingly endless oddities, difficulties and drama, the death of Justice Ginsburg comes at such a time as to seem to fit into the story of the year at a Cosmic level.  Now, added to all of the other drama of the final stages of the Presidential Campaign of 2020, we will have a Supreme Court Justice nomination, and confirmation.

Justice Ginsburg was born in Brooklyn and grew up in Flatbush.  Born to Jewish parents, her father was a Ukrainian immigrant.  She attended Cornell, meeting Martin Ginsburg, the man she would marry, at age 17.  After marrying she worked a variety of jobs while her husband served as an Army officer, having been commissioned following his university graduation through a ROTC commission.  In 1956 she entered Harvard Law School, transferring later to Columbia when her husband took a job in New York.  She thereby became the first woman to publish in Columbia's and Harvard's law reviews.

Following law school she had difficulty finding employment due to her gender. The prejudice against female lawyers was strong at the time, and indeed would be for decades thereafter.  She went on to be a civil rights litigator with the ACLU. Her work lead her to be appointed to the United States Appeals Court for the District of Columbia in 1980, as one of Jimmy Carter's appointments.  She advanced to the Supreme Court in 1993 when nominated by Bill Clinton.

Ginsburg was a formidable intellect and will go down as one of the Court's titans.  Her position on the court can be regarded as having been on the center left.  In recent years she became the focus of the future direction of the Court as, after the resignation of Anthony Kennedy, she appeared to be the most likely justice to step down, due to age or health, or be removed by death.  Now the latter has happened.  It is well known that Ginsburg herself was carrying on in hopes of making it to the next Presidential term in anticipation of being replaced by a Democratic President.

Now she'll probably be replaced by a nominee named by President Trump.  It's clear that the Senate is highly likely to take this up rapidly under Mitch McConnell, but less clear that Republican Senators who are facing difficulties holding on to the Senate will be willing to stake their political fortunes to an act which will be hugely unpopular with Democrats and which will become a focus of the remainder of President Trump's term.  Indeed, to at least some extent, a rapid process on the part of Mitch McConnell, assuming a quick nomination by President Trump, will have a certain appearance of throwing Trump, and perhaps some Republican Senators, under the bus, as the act is likely to be so unpopular with Democrats.  That would also be a concession on McConnell's part, a concession which has already been made as a practical matter, that in the 21st Century United States the Supreme Court is the most important branch of the government.

At any rate, Ginsburg, agree with her positions or not, was a legal giant. Only Anthony Scalia, her friend outside of the court and opposite on the court, rivaled her in that regard.

Experts tout proposals for Supreme Court term limits

 Experts tout proposals for Supreme Court term limits

Doorway Into the Past: Liberty County Courthouse

Doorway Into the Past: Liberty County Courthouse: South entrance - the original doors and transoms have been replaced  Each of the Texas Courthouses have an interesting story or two to...

Doorway Into the Past: Caldwell County Courthouse, Lockhart Texas

Doorway Into the Past: Caldwell County Courthouse, Lockhart Texas: The Caldwell County Courthouse clock tower stands high above the surrounding buildings signalling to approaching visitors that they are n...

Doorway Into the Past: Kerr County Courthouse

Doorway Into the Past: Kerr County Courthouse: The exterior of the Kerr County Courthouse (Kerrville, Texas) may not appear as ornate as other Texas Courthouses and it is not on the ...

Fallon County Courthouse, Baker Montana

This is the Fallon County Courthouse, which also houses the county and city offices and the county library, in Fallon County Montana. The building is located in the county seat of Baker.

I was obviously there in the middle of winter, and on a cold day at that.

An American Legion dedicated flag pole is in front of the courthouse, dedicated to the veterans of all wars.

Blog Mirror. Lex Anteinternet: Wednesday, January 29, 1919. Inns At Court

I'm posting this here, even though it's way off topic, due to the interesting photograph of the Inns At Court in a surprising use.

Hors de combat.

Wednesday, January 29, 1919. Colonies in issue, Secret Treaties Exposed, Immigration to be halted, State Prohibition Bill Advances as 18th Amendment Certified, Mexican Rebels reported defeated again, and Yanks can Marry By Mail.

English Inns at Court being used as an American Navy rest barracks, Red Cross supplies being unloaded.  January 29, 1919.

There was a lot to report on on this Wednesday, January 19, 1919.

The Peace Treaty was struggling on what to do with the colonies of the defeated.  Giving them nation status, unless they were European, seemed out of the question, so League of Nation mandates were being argued about instead.

The 18th Amendment was certified by Congress as ratified, but the State was still going to pass a prohibition bill anyhow, showing that the desire to act on the already acted upon purposelessly already existed. There was no reason to pass any Prohibition bill in Wyoming, but the Legislature was going to do it anyway.

And American soldiers could marry their sweethearts by mail, it was decided, exchanging vows by correspondence, apparently.  The validity of that in certain faiths, it might be noted, would be questionable.

As, in most cases, would be the purpose.  Separated by an ocean, the couples were not going to reunite until Johnny Came Marching Home anyhow.  And if he was going to instead find the Belle de France in la belle France. . . well that was probably going to happen anyhow as well.  About the only reason to do this would be to resolve questions of impending legitimacy, which perhaps would have been a concern in some instances.

And the economy was tanking while there were vast numbers of Europeans who were refugees, which no doubt put focus on immigration and which was accordingly being addressed in Congress.

Among the refugees were the Armenians.  Their plight was well known but it had not been addressed.

Apparently, to my huge surprise, leaving for Florida in the winter was already a thing.  I would not have guessed that at all, once again showing the application of Holscher's First Law of History.

Elsewhere, Mexican rebels were reported as defeated, once again.

New counties were a hot issue in the Legislature as well.

And a Laramie policeman was compelled to draw his pistol when in s scuffle with somebody who was thought to be speaking German.

Laramie, fwiw, had a German language church early on and, I think, at this time, so a Laramie resident who could speak German wouldn't be that odd.  Let alone that its a university town where, presumably, some people were still learning the language.

Lex Anteinternet: As we pass 700,000 views, the State of the Blog(s)...

Lex Anteinternet: As we pass 700,000 views, the State of the Blog(s)...: Lex Anteinternet Ostensibly exploring the practice of law before the internet. Heck, before good highways for that matter. ...

Platte County Courthouse, Wheatland Wyoming

Courthouse decorated for Memorial Day, 2014.

This is the Platte County Courthouse located in Platte County's seat, Wheatland Wyoming. The courthouse, in addition to housing the county court for Platte County, also houses one of the four courtrooms of Wyoming's 8th Judicial District, with the others being located in Douglas, Lusk and Torrington. The courthouse was built in 1917, and somewhat uniquely it has a monument dedicated to farmers called "The Irrigator". The Statute of Liberty is a monument for Platte County World War Two servicemen.

I've photographed this courthouse and its features at least three times. The first time was on a dreary July day in 2011.  I did it again in May 2014.  These most recent photographs are from November 2018.

A difference over this period of time is that a plaque commemorating the 100th anniversary of the founding of Platte County, which was in 1911, was put in. Additionally, a nice sidewalk clock was added on the walkway to the entrance of the courthouse.

A New Wind River Tribal Judicial Center?

 

 The current Wind River Tribal Court.

We wrote about this courthouse quite some time ago, here:

Courthouses of the West: Wind River Indian Reservation Tribal Court: This is the Wind River Indian Reservation Tribal Court, which also houses various other law related facilities. The court is located in F...

An interesting article in the Star Tribune reports that  representatives of the Tribal judicial system appeared in front of a committee of the Wyoming legislature this past week to seek support, which they received, for a new judicial center.  The Federal government will have to provide the funding, but state support can't hurt.

The jail is grossly overcrowded and apparently the new three judge panel for the Court is enforcing the criminal law much more rigorously than in the past.  The deficiencies of the courthouse, which includes the jail and the headquarters for the police department, are showing themselves.  About three times as many prisoners are housed there on a daily basis than it was built for.

I can attest personally that the courtroom is quite inadequate.  I hope they receive the funding they're seeking, and soon.

Town of Mills, Wyoming Municipal Court.

This is the Town of Mills Municipal Court in Mills, Wyoming.  Mills is a city adjacent to the City of Casper, so I should have added this additional Natrona County municipal court some time ago.

Lex Anteinternet: Monday At The Bar: Forgetting the past so we can ...

Lex Anteinternet: Monday At The Bar: Forgetting the past so we can ...: When I was first practicing law, a million years ago, the City of Casper determined to replace its part time contract judges with a full tim...

Lawrence County Courthouse. Speerfish South Dakota.

Probably the most remarkable thing about this photograph of the Lawrence County Courthouse in Speerfish, South Dakota is that (other than it being poorly aligned) is that there are no motorcycles in the photograph.  It took me four tries to achieve that.

Which is part of the hazards associated with taking a photograph in the Sturgis area during motorcycle rally week.

I don't know the vintage of this well preserved classic courthouse, but it's clearly an older one and very nice in appearance.  The court houses South Dakota's Fourth Judicial District and serves as the county seat for Lawrence County as well.

University of Wyoming College of Law Large Moot Court, Laramie Wyoming

This is the large Moot Court Room for the University of Wyoming.  Having been in most of the courtrooms in the state I can safely say that its one of the nicest in the entire state.

The back half, or gallery half, of the courtroom has a moveable wall that can open up to allow greater space, or perhaps just more conventional space in the courtroom and also allow the courtroom to function as a lecture hall.  Viewed as a courtroom, what we see here in front of us is the bar of the court.

When I went to UW's College of Law it didn't have a moot courtroom at all, now it has two, a large one and a small one (I have yet to see the small one).  This particular room was the large classroom at the time.  It is quite a facility and I guess it demonstrates how much the physical assets of the College of Law have improved in the past three decades.

According to the University, the College of Law will allow the courtroom to be used by the state courts upon request, if it is not already in use.

Lex Anteinternet: And the nominee is . .

Lex Anteinternet: And the nominee is . .: Neil Gorsuch of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals. He's a conservative textualist who is well suited to replace the late Antonin Scali...

Harris County Texas Courthouses

These photographs depict, from a distance, the old and new Harris County Texas courthouses.  The old one, a classically styled courthouse, was built in 1910.  The new one much more recently, having been started in 2003.

The new courthouse is a seventeen story structure.  Locals in the law seem quite proud of it, but I don't know what I think.  It retains some classic elements but it's sort of big and overgrown.

Sublette County Courthouse, Pinedale Wyoming

This is the Sublette County Courthouse in Pinedale, Wyoming.  The courthouse is the seat, for Sublette County, of the two courts of Wyoming's 9th Judicial District.

I'm unsure of the vintage of this courthouse, but I'm guess it dates to at least the 1950s, although I could be in error.   The court is in a Federalist style.

Lex Anteinternet: Rally for Public Lands, Casper Wyoming, November 5...

Rally for Public Lands, Casper Wyoming, November 5, 2016

 



 Rally for Public Lands:

 Join Us!

—WHEN—

Saturday, November 5th

1:00 pm – 3:00 pm

—WHERE—

Izaak Walton League,

4205 Fort Caspar Road

—WHAT—

Live music, keynote speakers, food & drinks!

Jefferson County Courthouse, Port Arthur Texas.

This is the courthouse for Jefferson County, Texas, in Port Arthur.

This courthouse is one of the many public works projects courthouses Built during the Great Depression.  As the sign for the courthouse notes, it was built in 1935 and 1936, at time during which the fortunes of Port Arthur frankly look t have been better than they currently are.

Does this courthouse belong on this blog?  That's a question I'll soon be addressing but it is debatable.  This Courthouse is technically west of the Mississippi, but culturally, it's in the Deep South.  I've posted it, but frankly, this is about as far east and south, in more ways than one, that a person can get and still claim, if they can, that this is a "Western" courthouse.

Frank E. Moss Federal Courthouse and United States Courthouse for the District of Utah. Salt Lake City, Utah.

Built in 1931, the last year of the Hoover Administration, this classic courthouse is nestled in downtown Salt Lake City.   The current name is much more recent, coming from a long serving Utah Senator who retired in 1977.

Just behind this classic revival style courthouse is a large modern office building which is the current United States Courthouse for the District of Utah, which has the local nickname of the "Borg Cube" due to its modern architecture, and in obvious reference to the characters from Star Trek.  That also forms a fairly effective commentary on what the public thinks of modern style courthouses, so I don't need to add to that, and could hardly do so more effectively.

Detail from the Frank E. Moss Courthouse

While most of the court's functions have moved to the new courthouse, the old one continues to house the bankruptcy court.

Lex Anteinternet: What Are You Reading?

Over on our most active blog, Lex Anteinternet: What are you reading?:

What are you reading?

A new trailing thread, dedicated to what we're currently reading.

And. . . we hope. . . with participation from you.

What are you reading right  now? Add it down in the commentary section
__________________________________________________________________________________

June 21, 2016

Give Me Eighty Men

I'm presently reading Give Me Eighty Men by Shannon Smith. It's a history of the Fetterman Fight, and a history of the history of the Fetterman Fight. I'll review it when I'm done, but I'll note that the favorable mention of the book by the authors of The Heart of All That Is caused me to pick it up, even though I'd been inclined to previously avoid it.

So far, I'm enjoying it, and its certainly raising a lot questions in my mind about the Fetterman battle, although I'm reserving my judgment on various things so far.

Stop over and let us know what you're reading!

That thread:  What Are You Reading?

Lex Anteinternet: More Monday At The Bar. U.S. Supreme Court: The ...

Lex Anteinternet: More Monday At The Bar. U.S. Supreme Court: The ...: One of the most shocking features of US Constitutional law is that the Bill of Rights doesn't apply, at all, to Indians on the Reservat...

Lex Anteinternet: Additional Monday at the Bar. Lex Anteinternet: T...

Lex Anteinternet: Additional Monday at the Bar. Lex Anteinternet: T...: As we earlier reported on this item: Lex Anteinternet: The ghost of the Crow Treaty of 1868 appears in a ... :    Crow Indians, 1908. Th...

Matheson Courthouse, Salt Lake City Utah

This impressive structure in downtown Salt Lake City houses Utah's Third Judicial District.  The interesting design, poorly photographed here, combines modern and classical elements to make for an attractive courthouse.

Rock Springs City Hall, Rock Springs Wyoming

This is a photo I took of the old Rock Springs City Hall while on my way to a deposition.  It's really taken from the wrong angle, and it's not a great photo. This photos is typical of the "on my way" to somewhere photos that end up on this blog.

And its of a city hall, not a true courthouse, but almost every city hall of this vintage served as a city court and city jail.  This one has a small jail in it, by my recollection, based upon the one time I toured it.  It's now a museum.

The building was built in 1894.

Lex Anteinternet: Limiting Supreme Court terms

Lex Anteinternet: Limiting Supreme Court terms: An interesting proposal is being floated to limit Supreme Court terms to 18  years, with those terms being staggered so that one comes up e...

Lex Anteinternet: Antonin Scalia passes on.

Lex Anteinternet: Antonin Scalia passes on.: By the time this goes up here, this will hardly be in the category of really new "news", as it was already widely discussed an...

Johnson County Justice Center, Buffalo Wyoming

This is the Johnson County Justice Center in Buffalo Wyoming. This structure replaced the old Johnson County Courthouse that was in use up until recently.