Category: Law & Order
Police to New Jersey gym that opened in defiance of order: “Have a good day.”
BELLMAWR, N.J. – A gym in southern New Jersey has reopened for business in defiance of a state order that shut down nonessential businesses to help stem the spread of the coronavirus.
People began gathering outside the Atilis Gym in Bellmawr several hours before it reopened at 8 a.m. Monday.
“We are and only were here for everybody’s safety today. We planned for the worst and hoped for the best, and it seems like that’s what we have out here today,” the officer said to the owners and surrounding crowd.
“Formally, you are all in violation of the executive order. On that note, have a good day. Everybody be safe,” the officer said before walking away as the crowd erupted in cheers.
Actually the prosecutor probably determined that further prosecution persecution would be detrimental to his political future.
Charges dropped against Florida pastor who held church services despite coronavirus restrictions
Prosecutors in Florida have dropped misdemeanor charges against a Florida pastor who defied the state’s stay-at-home order to continue church services.
Evangelical megachurch leader Rodney Howard-Browne of the River at Tampa Bay Church had the charges of unlawful assembly and violating quarantine orders during a public health emergency dropped Friday. Hillsborough State Attorney Andrew Warren said the arrest was appropriate that it only came “after repeated efforts to gain cooperation in other ways were not successful.”
“In deciding whether to criminally prosecute violations of stay-at-home orders, compliance is our North Star,” Warren said, according to the Tampa Bay Times. “Each case is unique, and each one will be assessed based on the facts and the law. But, in general, if the person who was arrested poses no ongoing threat to public health, then our tendency will be not to prosecute the case beyond the arrest.”
Warren said that since the pastor was arrested, he has “maintained responsible social distancing” and has engaged with community leaders about how to move forward during the coronavirus pandemic.
“Our office has determined that further prosecution or punishment would not provide increased protections for our community and is not needed to achieve any additional change in Pastor Howard-Browne’s behavior,” he said.
Howard-Browne was arrested in late March after he repeatedly flouted Florida’s social distancing restrictions and continued to hold crowded church services……….
Justice Department Calls Church Service Restrictions Unconstitutional
Officials single out Gov. Northam for criminally charging pastor for holding services.
Attorney General William Barr’s Justice Department has been a consistent advocate of religious freedom throughout the coronavirus lockdown. In its latest move, it is signaling that governors likely never had the authority to restrict church gatherings.
Officials on Sunday filed a statement of interest supporting a Virginia church that sued Gov. Ralph Northam for capping congregations at 10 people. It says that unless Northam can prove that his 10-person limit is applicable to all gatherings, then he is violating the First Amendment freedom of speech and religion clauses.
Here are the facts of the case. On Palm Sunday, pastor Kevin Wilson of Lighthouse Fellowship Church in Chincoteague convened a service with 16 people present in a building that typically seats more than 200. All congregants sanitized their hands upon entering and maintained a six-foot social distance, according to the church’s suit.
To make its point clear, the church included in its filing photos of many people shopping while social distancing at Walmart, Lowe’s, and other big stores.
Midway through the service, several police officers wearing masks entered the church and asked to speak with Wilson. They issued him a citation and told everyone else gathered that if they returned for an Easter Sunday service, they would all receive citations, too.
In Virginia, the punishment for violating Northam’s stay at home order is a $2,500 fine or up to one year in prison. Wilson called off his Easter service.
But because Wilson does not have the capacity to broadcast his service online, forgoing the service meant that Easter at Lighthouse was essentially canceled. And even if he was able to stream the service, many of his congregants don’t have internet and wouldn’t be able to watch anyway.
This situation, the church alleged, was grounds for suit because Northam’s order does not take into consideration the fact that some churches need to meet in person to continue their public practice of faith. Preventing them from meeting, it said, is tantamount to preventing them from a free exercise of religion. Furthermore, it added, the order is weighted unfairly against churches because it allows businesses to remain open in a modified fashion — but still with more than 10 people in a building at once.
To make its point clear, the church included in its filing photos of many people shopping while social distancing at Walmart, Lowe’s, and other stores. It also included a photo of Northam himself, speaking at a press conference and surrounded by many more than 10 people, all of whom were social distancing. Under Northam’s order, these are considered essential gatherings — and Lighthouse argued that church should be included in that category.
The Justice Department found the photos and Lighthouse’s arguments compelling. After all, if people can be trusted to social distance at stores, DOJ officials wrote, then why not at churches, too?
“The orders, by exempting other activities permitting similar opportunities for in-person gatherings of more than 10 individuals, while at the same time prohibiting churches from gathering in groups of more than 10 — even with social distancing measures and other precautions — has impermissibly interfered with the church’s free exercise of religion,” DOJ officials wrote. “Unless the Commonwealth can prove that its disparate treatment of religious gatherings is justified by a compelling reason and is pursued through the least restrictive means, this disparate treatment violates the Free Exercise Clause, and the orders may not be enforced against the church.”
Although the statement does not take a position on whether or not churches such as Lighthouse are wise to meet in person, it asserts that Northam (or any other governor, for that matter) shouldn’t take a position either.
This opinion is consistent with Barr’s last intervention in a coronavirus-related religious freedom lawsuit. In April, Barr himself filed a statement of interest supporting a church in Mississippi that had sued Greenville Mayor Errick Simmons for shutting down its drive-in services.
Barr said that if drive-in fast food restaurants such as Sonic are allowed to remain open, then drive-in churches should be treated the same way. Simmons, he said, was not only violating the First Amendment, but also the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a federal law that prevents governments from imposing “special restrictions on religious activity that do not also apply to similar nonreligious activity.”
“It is unclear why prohibiting these services is the least restrictive means of protecting public health,” Barr wrote of the drive-in services. “Especially if, as alleged in the complaint, the city allows other conduct that would appear to pose equal — if not greater — risks.”
Barr’s words had an almost immediate impact: Simmons revoked his order the next day at the direction of Gov. Tate Reeves (R). And, in a series of court decisions handed down in the next few weeks, judges ruled in favor of drive-in services in similar lawsuits across the country.
It remains to be seen if the Justice Department’s support for in-person services will have the same practical impact as its support for drive-ins. Many governors, judges, and even church leaders are risk-averse — especially as states move toward reopening — and do not want sudden outbreaks because they flung open the church doors too soon.
Even if Lighthouse’s lawsuit fails, the Justice Department’s argument vindicates frustrated churchgoers. It’s not just unfortunate that so many states are restricting religious services more stringently than other gatherings. It’s unconstitutional.
An essential principle of the United States is that it is a free country, with individual liberties guaranteed, and government power limited. That concept is now being tested. A deadly worldwide pandemic has led to draconian lockdowns, forced closings of businesses, and even mandatory “stay at home” orders, some with Orwellian, friendly sounding names like “Safer at Home” or “Stay Home, Stay Healthy” – but still mandatory and enforced by police. The unprecedented, far-reaching orders have been issued by unelected county health officers as well as by governors of states.
Are these orders legal? Do state governors have the legal and Constitutional authority to forcibly close all “non-essential” businesses? To confine the entire population in their homes indefinitely without a trial? Who gets to decide which businesses are non-essential? In California, churches, synagogues and mosques have been deemed “non-essential” and ordered closed, but liquor and hardware stores are still open and doing a bustling business.
President Trump proclaimed a national state of emergency under the National Emergencies Act on March 13, 2020. However, nothing in that proclamation closed any businesses, confined anyone in their homes or infringed on any other constitutional rights or liberties. That, and other actions by the federal government merely cleared away certain regulatory roadblocks that could interfere with the government’s response to the pandemic.
By contrast, the orders issued at the state and local level have dramatically restricted the civil liberties of ordinary law-abiding Americans, shutting down all “non-essential” businesses, causing, at last count, 22 million Americans to lose their jobs, and confining the vast majority of the nation to their homes. All of this was accomplished not pursuant to any laws specifically authorizing these actions, but rather, on the basis of general laws pertaining to emergencies and quarantines. For example, the statewide order in California is based on the governor’s power, during a state of emergency, to coordinate a State Emergency Plan, to exercise authority over agencies of the state government and to exercise the police power vested in the state, and the state Health Department’s authority to “quarantine, isolate, inspect, and disinfect persons, animals, houses, rooms, other property, places, cities, or localities, whenever in its judgment the action is necessary to protect or preserve the public health.” Nothing in the state law specifically authorizes the governor to order all residents of the state to be confined to their homes indefinitely, or to shutter all businesses deemed non-essential, so the state government is proceeding instead under these very broad, general provisions which have never before in the history of the state been employed or interpreted in such an all-encompassing manner.
Not only has this crisis given government officials with authoritarian impulses an opportunity to rule by decree, it has exposed the lamentable fact that most Americans tend to willingly obey such “orders” without even questioning whether they are legally valid.
What are the limits of government power? Do governors really have the authority to issue such sweeping orders controlling the personal lives of each of the millions of citizens living within the borders of their states? To answer that question, it is necessary to first examine the bedrock principle of democracy – that government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed. This principle is enshrined in our Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” The power that a government may legitimately exercise is only that power that has been conferred on the government by the people.
In the United States, that power is delegated to government officials by constitutions and laws. Governors are not kings. They do not rule over the people in their states; rather, they are employees of the state and have been given certain executive powers as specified in the state constitution. These powers are always limited and never absolute.
The supreme law of the United States is the federal Constitution, a document so fundamental to our system of governance that, to the extent that any law conflicts with it, that law is deemed invalid.
The First Amendment to the Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Through the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, this prohibition was made applicable to the state governments. And yet, these “stay-at-home orders” very clearly and overtly restrict the “right of the people peaceably to assemble” and the orders shuttering churches and other houses of worship undeniably infringe on the free exercise of religion.
While it is easy for government officials to say that worship can be done remotely or in the privacy of the homes to which we are all individually confined, the fact remains that for many religious believers, there is an admonition to come together to worship, and for others, it is imperative to present prayers and offerings in a holy house of worship. Some people (the homeless, for example), may not have remote electronic access to worship services. In any event, it is not for the government to decide that these religious beliefs are unimportant or that they may be disregarded. And if home improvement stores, banks, supermarkets and Walmarts are permitted to remain open so long as social distancing measures are practiced, why are churches not allowed to do the same?
The right to travel has also been recognized as a fundamental individual right guaranteed by the Constitution. “The right to travel is a part of the ‘liberty’ of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.” Kent v. Dulles , 357 U.S. 116 (1958) And yet, the orders confining the entire population to their homes except for “essential activities” like buying liquor or power tools (but definitely not going to church on Easter Sunday) restrict the right of the people to travel.
When individual Constitutional rights and liberties are impacted by government action, such action is subject to “strict scrutiny” by the courts. The government must establish that there is a “compelling state interest” and that its action is the “least restrictive means” to promote that interest. It seems highly dubious that an indefinite lockdown of the entire population is the “least restrictive means” to achieve any legitimate objective.
It is hard to imagine a more restrictive means than locking everyone up in their homes and shuttering all businesses deemed “non-essential.” The state may have the power to quarantine certain individuals who are reasonably suspected of having been exposed to the SARS-COv-2 virus, but in the U.S., only about one tenth of one percent of the population have tested positive. That is hardly reasonable justification for incarcerating the entire population under house arrest without due process of law.
A less-restrictive means of achieving the government interest would be to identify high-risk individuals — those who have been exposed or those who have particular susceptibility to the disease — and place them under quarantine or some form of isolation, while letting the vast majority of Americans continue to enjoy their liberties and Constitutional rights.
Another method would be to do as Sweden has done, and implement social distancing rules and recommendations without shutting down businesses or forcibly confining the entire population in their homes. Or perhaps houses of worship — where constitutionally protected activity takes place — could be allowed to operate under the same rules as grocery stores, hardware stores and wine shops: no forced closing, but everyone maintains a six-foot separation and wears a face covering. There are any number of possible less restrictive means of slowing the spread of the virus. The means that the state governments have chosen appear to be the most restrictive means, rather than the least.
The Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution does not mention any exceptions to individual rights and liberties when there is a declared state of emergency. Such an exception, if it existed, would effectively render the rights illusory, because authoritarian-minded government officials could simply declare an emergency and thereby negate the rights of the people. Indeed, this is, historically, the way it has usually been done It is at fearful times like these when our individual rights are most threatened and most in need of being protected and preserved.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held that “emergency may not create power.” Wilson v. New, 243 U.S. 332 (1917), citing Ex Parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2 (1866). The Civil War did not give President Lincoln the authority to have civilians in Indiana tried by military commissions without due process of law. Even during such a chaotic time when the nation was convulsed in violence and bloodshed, individual Constitutional rights were protected. Those precious rights should be no less protected today. No virus can strip Americans of their civil rights. But as this crisis and the government responses to it have shown, if we are not vigilant in protecting our liberties, they will be taken from us.
Maine’s Franklin County Sheriff Scott Nichols has a strong message for the Governor of Maine, Janet Mills, who issued “stay-at-home” orders with threats of police punishment if not followed. Sheriff Nichols issued a statement on the Franklin County Facebook page saying in no uncertain terms he will not follow the unconstitutional order.
“We will not be setting up a Police State. PERIOD,” he wrote. “The Sheriff’s Office will not purposefully go out and stop vehicles because they are on the road or stop and ask why people are out and about. To do so puts our officers at risk. This is not Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia where you are asked for your papers!”
The sheriff’s announcement comes as a welcome sign to Americans who have been arrested for inane things like praying outside, surfing, or trying to drive to work. Someone has to stand up to the unconstitutional directives that are being handed down daily by government officials and it will fall on the sheriffs to uphold what they know to be their legal and lawful duties, none of which involve trampling the rights of citizens…….
Nichols made it clear that he only intends to arrest for matters of law-breaking, and nothing else. Executive orders aren’t laws. He finished his announcement with words of encouragement for his constituents: “Most of you are doing a fantastic job – we appreciate that! Please look out for one another, especially the elderly and shut-ins. Please be a good neighbor/citizen always showing compassion. Please be kind especially on social media, negativity online only adds to the stress people are currently experiencing.”
Nichols signed this brave decree with his name and followed it with “Of the People, For the People.”
“You can’t shoot a virus” The Crap-For-Brains Sheriff said. What-An-Idiot. He knows what people are buying guns for; Self Defense. It’s just that he can’t stand the fact the people are realizing that ‘the authorities’ aren’t going to be there when things go from bad to worse and they will have to be their own First Responders.
LA County Sheriff halts efforts to close gun stores after county counsel intervention.
LOS ANGELES – The Los Angeles County Sheriff told FOX 11 on Tuesday night that enforcement efforts to close down local gun stores have been suspended after intervention from the county’s legal counsel.
Sheriff Alex Villanueva told FOX 11 reporter Bill Melugin that county counsel Mary Wickham issued an opinion that gun stores can be classified as essential businesses under the Governor’s statewide executive order.
Sheriff Villanueva everything is now in “limbo”, and added he reached out to the Governor’s office to get clarification on how gun stores should be classified, but never got a response.
Up until the legal opinion, Villanueva said a majority of gun shops were complying with his order to close down.
The Sheriff maintained that he believes gun stores should not be open to the general public right now because he feels there are too many first time buyers making panic purchases of guns they don’t know how to operate and they aren’t familiar with California’s strict laws.
“You can’t shoot a virus,” Villanueva said.
SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (KY3) – Police say a gunman shot three civilians, a Springfield police officer and then himself after an overnight attack inside a Springfield convenience store.
It happened late Sunday night at the Kum and Go on east Chestnut Expressway. Police say Joaquin S. Roman, 31, burst into the store and opened fire killing Troy Rapp, Shannon Perkins, and Matthew Hicks-Morris.
Troy Rapp, 57-year-old man, worked at the Kum and Go. Shannon Perkins, a 46-year-old man, worked for WCA Waste Corporation. Matthew Hicks-Morris, a 22-year-old man, who was a customer in the store.
One other still unidentified civilian is in critical condition.
Springfield police officer Christopher Walsh was shot when he got to the store, before Roman shot and killed himself. Officer Walsh later died at a Springfield hospital.
Police Chief Paul Williams only spoke to reporters for a few minutes Monday morning, but that was more than enough time to see and feel the pain his department is experiencing over Officer Walsh’s death.
The words were difficult for Chief Paul Williams to deliver for the first time in his 10-year career in Springfield.
“Officer Christopher Walsh suffered a fatal gunshot wound and passed away at the hospital,” Williams said.
Speaking to reporters just hours after one of his officers died in a gas station shooting, Williams took the podium and didn’t want to go beyond just the terrible facts.
“It’s way too early,” Williams said.
A string of reported shootings across southeast Springfield late Sunday night led up to Walsh’s death, ultimately leading to the Kum & Go near E. Chestnut and Highway 65.
“Officer Josiah Overton and Officer Christopher Walsh were first to arrive and were immediately fired upon by the suspect,” Williams said.
Both officers were hit.
“Officer Josiah Overton sustained non-life threatening injuries and is being treated at a local hospital,” Williams said.
Officer Overton has been with SPD for two years.
Officer Walsh joined the force in 2016. He was from Springfield. He went to Glendale High School before going through an EMT program at Ozarks Technical Community College.
“Officer Walsh was with SPD for three and a half years and was a U.S. Army veteran who remained active in the Army Reserves,” Williams said.
Officer Walsh’s Army supervisor said this is an emotional time and sent KY3 News a statement.
1st Sgt. Jason Vazquez wrote: “The 428th Transportation Company family is completely heartbroken by the loss of one of its members. Sgt. Christopher Walsh was not only a great husband and father, but an outstanding leader and Soldier.”
Officer Walsh was 32 years old. He leaves behind a wife and daughter, and a chief now leading a department that is faced with the kind of tragedy it hasn’t seen in decades.
“Both of these officers showed significant bravery and were heroic in their actions,” Williams said.
Homeowner Shoots, Kills Intruder
MILTON, GA — A homeowner shot and killed an intruder Saturday in Milton, police said.
At 8:40 p.m. on Saturday, Milton Police received a 911 call regarding burglary at a home in the 12000 block of New Providence Road.
Prior to police arrival, the suspect reportedly forcibly broke into the home through a locked front door and confronted the homeowner. The homeowner shot the intruder with a handgun, striking him multiple times in the torso.
The suspect was treated at the scene by Milton Fire-Rescue personnel for gunshot wounds, and transported to WellStar North Fulton Hospital. The suspect was later pronounced dead at the hospital.
The deceased suspect was identified as Corey Patton II, 23, from Charlotte, North Carolina. Milton Police said they do not believe there are any other suspects in this case.
Man shot by law enforcement after reportedly trying to carjack off-duty Pueblo County deputy
Definite mistake in the victim selection process. And the copy writer for KKTV need some more schooling because I did a ‘whut?’ the first time I read that headline.
PUEBLO, Colo (KKTV) – A man is dead after first leading police on a chase and then trying to carjack an off-duty Pueblo County sheriff’s deputy late Sunday night.
Pueblo police said officers were investigating a carjacking that happened around 10 p.m. at a 7-Eleven off Elizabeth Street and Highway 50. During that carjacking, officers said the suspect hit the victim in the head with a handgun and stole a 2004 Dodge truck.
The suspect was identified on Tuesday by the Pueblo County Coroner as Joshua Russell of Pueblo.
While police were at the gas station investigating the carjacking, officers said they were talking to a man and woman in an Escalade. During the conversation, the 35-year-old man abruptly took off. At some point during his attempt to flee, police said his car became immobile.
“The speculation is that he hit the curb over here, full head-on, and that’s what damaged the vehicle,” said Sgt. Frank Ortega with the Pueblo Police Department.
Officers sped after the suspect, who didn’t even make it a quarter-mile on Highway 50.
“That individual exited the vehicle with an AR-style rifle and attempted to carjack two vehicles. The first vehicle continued westbound; the second vehicle was an off-duty sheriff’s deputy,” Ortega said.
The deputy fired at the suspect.
“At the same time, or roughly the same time, an on-duty Pueblo police officer engaged the suspect. Several rounds were fired, and the suspect is deceased on scene,” Ortega said.
The shooting happened just before midnight. Ortega said there is no indication that the suspect fired his weapon, but the Colorado Bureau of Investigation is processing the scene for any evidence otherwise. Both the deputy and the officer are on paid administrative leave.
Police said the woman who was with the suspect in the car was interviewed and is cooperating.
Detectives are also investigating whether the suspect is the same person involved in the 7-Eleven carjacking.
“The male that is deceased here on the highway, he doesn’t match the suspect description from the original carjacking exactly,” Ortega said. “But they’re reviewing video from that original incident to see if he’s involved or not.”
Shortly after the shooting, Ortega said police found the Dodge truck that was originally stolen from the 7-Eleven not too far from the scene.
Gov. Andy Beshear signs bill requiring school resource officers to carry guns
Despite calls from civil rights groups to veto the legislation, Gov. Andy Beshear on Friday signed a bill requiring school police to carry guns.
All Kentucky schools are now required to have at least one armed police officer under state law, effective immediately.
While understanding opposition to the measure, Beshear said at a press conference Friday he could not allow officers to not have the weapons they may need in confronting a school shooting.
“I simply cannot ask a school resource officer to stop an armed gunman entering a school without them having the ability to not only achieve this mission, but also to protect themselves,” Beshear said. “We must be able to stop the worst of the worst.”
Signing Senate Bill 8 is best for the state as a whole, he continued.
Moving forward, Beshear said his administration will work on training officers to “start addressing the reason some kids might not feel safe because of a police officer.”
Beshear’s decision comes after the bill passed the Senate and House with large bipartisan margins, making a veto almost guaranteed to be overridden.
Perjury charge filed against woman who tried to have CSU officer’s weapons confiscated
FORT COLLINS, Colo. — A perjury charge has been filed against Susan Holmes, the woman who recently tried to use Colorado’s new “red flag” law to have a Colorado State University officer’s weapons confiscated.
Earlier this month, Holmes filed an extreme risk protection order against Cpl. Phillip Morris. It was denied.
Morris shot and killed Holmes’ son in 2017. The district attorney found the shooting to be “clearly justified.”
A petition for an extreme risk protection order requires the petitioner to have a connection to the respondent, such as being a blood relative, a marriage or domestic partner, or having a child in common with the respondent.
Under penalty of perjury, Holmes claimed she had a child in common with Morris when in fact, she does not.
On Thursday, Colorado court records showed Holmes is charged with one count of perjury and one count of attempt to influence a public servant. The latter charge is for allegedly lying to a judge.
The Larimer County Sheriff’s Office said a warrant is out for Holmes and she is not in custody. The sheriff’s office confirmed the warrant is in relation to the ERPO case.
The warrant has been active for about one week.
Holmes’ bond is currently set at $5,000.
Virginia Sheriff Richard Vaughan Explains Why He Won’t Enforce Gov. Ralph Northam’s Gun Control Laws
Over 90% of Illegal Aliens Nabbed Had Criminal Convictions or Pending Charges
“North Carolina’s Mecklenburg County, that state’s largest, was among the biggest offenders, releasing numerous violent criminals rather than turn them over to federal authorities for removal. Among them was a previously deported Honduran charged with rape and child sex crimes.” — Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Report.
Over 90% of the criminal illegal aliens arrested in 2019 had either criminal convictions or pending charges. The average was four charges per alien.
And yet Democrats insist on putting the well-being of these criminal aliens before the safety of American citizens.
The report also found the number of individuals apprehended or found inadmissible nationwide totaled 1,148,024, an increase of 68 percent over the previous fiscal year. Over one million illegals crossed into the United States in 2019 because the Democratic Party and news media care more about the well-being of lawbreakers with open border policies, sanctuary states and cities, and a deep hatred for President Donald Trump and for the nation’s law enforcement.
More than 90% of illegal immigrants arrested by federal agents in the United States last year had criminal convictions or pending criminal charges, including 56,000 assaults and thousands of sex crimes, robberies, homicides and kidnappings. Many had “extensive criminal histories with multiple convictions,” according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) year-end report.
Appeals Court Allows Use of $3.6 Billion in Military Funds for Border Wall
A federal appeals court allowed the administration to use a certain set of Defense Department funds for the construction of the border wall after a lower court blocked the administration from dipping into them last month.
The ruling marks a victory for President Donald Trump, who has sought to shore up funds for his signature border wall. The money is separate from other funds that the Supreme Court allowed to be used last year.
In a 2-1 ruling, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay of a Texas judge’s order, which the administration had appealed. The case is still ongoing.
The use of Defense Department funds for the President’s border wall has received pushback from numerous groups and states, which have argued the administration circumvented Congress to shore up wall funds.
The latest ruling applies to the military construction funds. Last September, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper authorized diverting $3.6 billion in the construction funds for 11 wall projects on the southern border with Mexico. The Pentagon said at the time that half the money was coming from deferred projects overseas, and the other half was planned for projects in the US.
The ruling doesn’t apply to the use of other funds, including counter-drug and Treasury Forfeiture Funds, that have been designated for wall construction.
Trump Is Quietly Winning Bigly At The Border.
Before this policy went into effect, illegal immigrant families knew that if they crossed the border and claimed asylum, they’d effectively get a free pass. Immigration officials would release them into the U.S. within 20 days, on the promise that they would show up for their court date months in the future. Few bother to return. This policy was dubbed “Catch and Release” for a reason.
Now, they must wait in Mexico while immigration judges review their cases.
What “Remain in Mexico” revealed is how few asylum seekers have legitimate claims. In fact, judges granted asylum in less than 1% of the more than 10,000 MPP claims resolved so far, according to TRAC Research Center at Syracuse University.
The impact of this program has been little short of profound.
The number of apprehensions at the southwest border plummeted from 144,000 in May 2019 to just 42,649 in November – the last month for which the government has data. The number of families caught crossing illegally went from 84,486 in May to a mere 9,000 in November.
As the El Paso Times put it, “the policy has proved to be a virtual wall.”
Colorado’s Growing Second Amendment Sanctuary Movement
Virginia is not the only state where the ‘2A Sanctuary’ movement is taking off
The Delta County Board of County Commissioners’ work session on March 12, 2019, was standing room only.
Nearly 250 residents had packed into the county building in Western Colorado. Every available chair was filled, and attendees lined the wall elbow-to-elbow. To accommodate the unusually large crowd, county staff opened up a second meeting room and dialed up the internal conference line to broadcast what was being said in the main meeting room. Even with that additional space, attendees spilled out into the adjacent hallways—all attempting to jockey for a better position to listen in on deliberations.
The discussion that generated so much attention in this rural community of 30,568 started 275 miles away, in Denver: House Bill 1177 (H.B.1177), passed by the Colorado House of Representatives just 10 days prior. Officially titled “Extreme Risk Protection Orders” (ERPO), the bill would codify the seizure of firearms from citizens who are a perceived threat to themselves or others with an ex parte civil order.
Commonly referred to as a “red flag law,” this type of legislation is part of a state-by-state strategy pushed by gun control activists who were galvanized by the 2018 shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Prior to the Parkland shooting, five states had some sort of red flag law on the books; not including H.B. 1177, there are now 14.
Delta County residents showed up to the hearing because they were deeply concerned about the bill’s constitutionality. When the Delta County forum opened to public comment, resident after resident beseeched the commissioners to stand up in support of their individual rights to bear arms, private property, and due process. Sporting a shirt with the words “I plead the Second” in military stencil accompanied by the profile of an AR-15, one man standing in the hallway shouted “amen” and “yes, sir,” boisterously affirming each petitioner who referenced gun rights. Not one person spoke in support of the bill.
County leadership shared their antipathy toward the legislation. Delta County Sheriff Mark Taylor, who was elected sheriff in 2018 and also served as undersheriff for the previous 16 years, was the first to speak. Visibly and audibly nervous, Taylor read a prepared statement that expressed his own opposition to H.B. 1177.
“I feel that that bill goes beyond, there’s no due process as far as enforcing that bill,” Taylor says.
After summarizing his main objections—specifically, that the legislation violates the Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments—Taylor requested that the board of commissioners adopt a resolution that designated Delta County as a “Second Amendment Sanctuary County.” Taylor received a standing ovation from the audience.
What exactly constitutes “sanctuary” status for law enforcement is a point of contention throughout Colorado. Like Delta County, more than half of Colorado counties have adopted resolutions—some more strident, some more symbolic—explicitly challenging H.B.1177 and implicitly suggesting local law enforcement will not comply with the new law. Several sheriffs—predominately from rural Colorado—have publicly expressed their willingness to go to jail if court-ordered to issue an ERPO. Other sheriffs have said it is not their job to pick and choose the laws that they want to enforce.
Violent Crime Dropped In 2018 As States Embraced Pro-Gun Policies
The FBI’s 2018 “Crime in the United States” report collected crime data from law enforcement agencies across America. From the looks of it, the news is good.
The FBI highlights that “[In 2018] violent crime offenses decreased when compared with estimates from 2017. Robbery offenses fell 12.0 percent, murder, and non-negligent manslaughter offenses fell 6.2 percent, and the estimated volume of aggravated assault offenses decreased 0.4 percent.”
The report noted that violent crime rates bottomed out in 2014 to their lowest point since 1970. Furthermore, the 2018’s violent crime rate was the third-lowest since 1970.
During the last three decades, America has experienced significant changes in its gun laws throughout the country. Curiously, the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004, which many predicted would lead to bedlam in the streets. The data proved this wrong when the FBI noted that murder rates went down by 3.6 percent from 2003 to 2004, contrary to people’s fears.
However, most of the change regarding gun policies took place in state legislatures. While some states tightened up their gun control, others relaxed gun restrictions and even implemented policies such as Constitutional Carry — which allow law-abiding Americans to carry firearms without having to obtain a government permit. Increased carry has continued into the present.
A study on the number of concealed-carry permit holders released by gun expert John Lott indicated that “In 2019, the number of concealed handgun permits soared to now over 18.66 million—a 304 percent increase since 2007. About an 8 percent growth over the number of permits since 2018.” Additionally, per capita, gun ownership increased by 56 percent from 1993 to 2013. If we had taken the media at their word, we would have expected gun crime to skyrocket. Nevertheless, gun crime continued to plummet according to the FBI, which highlighted a 49 percent decrease.
Conventional rifles like the AR-15 have been largely demonized in recent years, being portrayed as a frequently used tool for carrying out attacks. As usual, the data contradicts media assumptions. For starters, AR-15s only accounted for 173 deaths in mass shootings from 2007 to 2017. Whereas, rifles of all categories were involved in 439 deaths on an annual basis. Putting this in perspective, rifles constituted 2 percent of homicides in 2018. On the other hand, knives (11 percent), hands, fists, and feet (5 percent) and blunt instruments (3 percent) were used in more homicides than rifles.
It’s safe to say that the current gun violence debate is mostly based on hysterics and not a careful analysis of the facts. Stripping the rights of millions of law-abiding gun owners is both unethical and an invitation for criminals to prey on victims whom they know will be defenseless.
Indeed, there’s gun violence in many of America’s urban centers. Solving the problem does not require implementing gun control of any type. More local forms of policing – that target areas where criminals tend to cluster and renewed civic engagement – will do much more to stop crime than passing new gun control laws. If the political circumstances permit it, many of these areas should entertain the idea of making it easier for law-abiding citizens to carry firearms.
No matter how we slice it, increased legislation is not the quick fix to gun violence problems in America.