The U.S. Supreme Court Is A Tragic, Pathetic Joke

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

The U.S. Supreme Court just issued its decision in Gamble v. United States, and “left the door open for state prosecutors to prosecute Trump campaign officials regardless of whether federal officials have already done so.”[2]  In his dissenting opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch—President Trump’s first appointment to the Court—wrote: 

A free society does not allow its government to try the same individual for the same crime until it’s happy with the result. Unfortunately, the Court today endorses a colossal exception to this ancient rule against double jeopardy.  My colleagues say that the federal government and each State are “separate sovereigns” entitled to try the same person for the same crime. So if all the might of one “sovereign” cannot succeed against the presumptively free individual, another may insist on the chance to try again. And if both manage to succeed, so much the better; they can add one punishment on top of the other. But this “separate sovereigns exception” to the bar against double jeopardy finds no meaningful support in the text of the Constitution, its original public meaning, structure, or history. Instead, the Constitution promises all Americans that they will never suffer double jeopardy. I would enforce that guarantee.[3]

Our Supreme Court has been a tragic, pathetic joke for years, certainly since it blessed infanticide in Roe v. Wade—and the killing of more than 55 million American babies.[4]  Also, Chief Justice John Roberts constitutes the second worst decision that former President George W. Bush made during his eight-year presidency—other than the senseless Iraq War in which more than 5,000 Americans died and many more were maimed, and trillions of dollars were wasted, for nothing.[5]

Perhaps an editorial of The New York Sun described the Gamble decision best:

How is it possible that, after all the tumult over the Supreme Court, the only two justices to grasp the plain language of the Constitution in respect of double jeopardy are — wait for it — Neil Gorsuch and Ruth Bader Ginsburg? It’s amazing enough that there are but two sages for the bedrock prohibition on double jeopardy. More amazing still that the question unites the right- and left-most justices.

The case, known as Gamble v. U.S., involves an ex-con named Terance Martez Gamble. He was pulled over in a traffic stop in 2015 at Alabama. A gun was found in his possession in violation of both Alabama and American law. Gamble pled to the state charges and drew a year. Then the federales turned around and charged him again for the same offense, drawing additional time for the same deed.

The justices rejected his appeal in an opinion — by Justice Alito — that reminds us of President Clinton’s hemming about how it depends on what the meaning of “is” is. In this case, it depends on the meaning of the word “offense.” The justices reckon there were two offenses, one carrying the blasted gun in Alabama and the other the same gun at the same time in the United States. Could the United Nations also charge him?

. . .

Justice Thomas, sage of what Myron Magnet, in his new book, calls the “lost Constitution,” manages to concur with the majority’s ruling against Gamble while attacking stare decisis. The ink wasn’t even dry on his concurrence when the press started warning that Justice Thomas was — yet again — prepping the ground for overturning Roe v. Wade. Others were more focused on the implications of Gamble for Paul Manafort.

New York, after all, is preparing to bring charges against President Trump’s former campaign manager even while Manafort sits in the Big House hoping for a pardon on federal charges. It’s not so clear, though, that New York will throw at Manafort the same charges Mr. Mueller levied. To discern differences between the federal and state cases against Gamble, though, one would need an electron microscope.

Our own interest in this case is neither stare decisis nor Paul Manafort nor Ms. Roe nor Mr. Wade. It is the plain language of the Fifth Amendment, where the prohibition against double jeopardy is laid down. Our national parchment was supposed to be a bar against such injustices as the state appealing acquittals or the law chasing someone from one court to another.

This is beautifully marked by both Justices Ginsburg and Gorsuch in two dissents. Justice Ginsburg, citing precedent about the separateness of federal and state laws, warned of “frittering away” Gamble’s liberty “upon a metaphysical subtlety, two sovereignties.” Thundered Justice Gorsuch: “A free society does not allow its government to try the same individual for the same crime until it’s happy with the result.”

It is not our intention to suggest that there can never be, say, a federal prosecution after a state acquittal. During the Jim Crow era, southern juries often ignored the facts. In those cases, though, the argument would be, and was, that the accused racists were never in genuine jeopardy in the first place. That is not what happened in the case of Terance Gamble.

All the more inspiring that the two dissenting judges from opposite ideological ends of the bench came together on this bedrock. It doesn’t suggest the confirmation battles are about nothing. It does remind all of us not to panic. The thinness of the vapors at the altitude where these justices breathe makes it hard to predict how they will behave. History teaches that great dissents have a way of getting vindicated over time.[6]

We can only hope that Justice Gorsuch’s dissenting opinion becomes the law of the land, which is not very promising given the 7-2 ruling—or for Paul Manafort and others who tried to help President Trump and may be caught in the insidious web of double jeopardy.  We have to thank our Supreme Court again for the perpetuation (or creation) of tragic injustices.[7] 

 

 

© 2019, Timothy D. Naegele

---

[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume-19-4-29). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See https://www.thedailybeast.com/scotus-reaffirms-double-jeopardy-exception-allowing-trump-campaign-officials-to-be-tried-by-state-feds (“Supreme Court Reaffirms ‘Double Jeopardy’ Exception With Mueller Probe Implications”—”The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday reaffirmed a 170-year-old exception to the Constitution’s double-jeopardy clause, and left the door open for state prosecutors to prosecute Trump campaign officials regardless of whether federal officials have already done so. The case, Gamble v. United States, has drawn attention for its potential effect on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s federal prosecutions on Russian interference in the 2016 election. Had the ‘dual sovereignty doctrine’ been repealed, states would not be able to pursue investigations parallel to the federal government. . . . State prosecutors in New York have brought charges against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort Jr., who was sentenced to seven and a half years in prison, in the event that President Trump pardons him”).

[3]  See Gamble v. United States, p. 64 (emphasis added), by clicking on the following link: https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/gamble-ussc-decision.pdf (or by downloading the decision).

Gamble USSC decisionDownload

[4] See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/abortions-and-autos-kill-more-in-america-than-guns/#comment-17243 (“Finally, More Abortion Bans Are Coming”—”Roe v. Wade unleashed a holocaust of epic proportions, which ranks with the greatest holocausts in human history—including the Nazi Holocaust, Stalin’s Soviet Holocaust and Mao’s Chinese Holocaust. Indeed, more human beings have been killed as a result of abortions—since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in 1973—than in each of the other three holocausts”).

[5] See, e.g., http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-and-the-mexican-judge-1465167405 (“[President] Obama . . . contributed to the Democratic intimidation campaign against Chief Justice John Roberts ahead of the 2012 ObamaCare ruling. ‘I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,’ the President said at an April 2012 press conference. The Chief Justice ruled as the President recommended”); https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-01/hold-the-revolution-roberts-keeps-joining-high-court-liberals (“Roberts Keeps Joining High Court Liberals”)

[6] See https://www.nysun.com/editorials/ginsburg-gorsuch-and-gamble/90732/ (“Ginsburg, Gorsuch — and Gamble“) (emphasis added).

[7] See https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2013/07/15/justice-and-the-law-do-not-mix/ (“Justice And The Law Do Not Mix”—”The United States is a nation where rogue prosecutors reign, whose goals in life include the prosecution of even the innocent. Federal, State and local prosecutors ruthlessly and gleefully pursue countless numbers of innocent Americans for a multitude of crimes that were never committed; and the judiciary has allowed this to happen. Corruption is rampant among federal prosecutors and those who work with them, such as FBI agents. No amount of rational thinking or discourse can be applied to a system that is inherently and systemically corrupt”); see also https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-ruling-deals-potential-blow-to-paul-manafort-as-he-battles-state-charges (“Supreme Court ruling deals potential blow to Paul Manafort as he battles state charges”) and https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/nyregion/manafort-rikers.html (“Paul Manafort Seemed Headed to Rikers. Then the Justice Department Intervened”).

Will Kavanaugh Prove Disastrous For The Democrats?

 By Timothy D. Naegele[1]

The confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh as the newest Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court has sent shock waves through America[2]; and its effects may be most pronounced for the Democrats—who lost.  And yes, lots of us began as Democrats, but will never vote for one again.

Something similar may be true of the Left’s stalwarts who demonstrated across this country, first for Bernie Sander’s candidacy as the Democrats’ nominee for president in 2016—which was co-opted and “buried” by Hillary Clinton and her thugs—and then to defeat Kavanaugh’s confirmation.  They may feel that they were cheated and sold down the river by the Democrats, who failed to deliver . . . again.

The wind may go out of their sails, while the Republicans—and especially the Trump “faithful”—may be energized almost like never before.  “How sweet it is” (they may say or think) that their efforts proved successful, as they did in the 2016 election.  With the U.S. economy seemingly purring along[3], they may be convinced of their righteousness and of the certitude of their actions, which may propel them on to other and even greater victories.

In retrospect, Kavanaugh may have been a flawed candidate, and perhaps even more of a flawed Justice.[4]  What his elevation to the Court may mean—along with Neil Gorsuch before him, and soon the feeble Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement—is that Donald Trump’s political and legal flanks will be protected against the Democrats’ efforts to remove him from the presidency.  If so, then the elevation of a flawed Kavanaugh to the Court will have served its purpose and satisfied Trump’s faithful.[5]

Aside from possibly defusing the Left’s zeal, the Kavanaugh confirmation fight has exposed its underbelly for all Americans to see.  Dianne Feinstein of California was shown to be an ineffectual, lying senator, who had kept a Chinese spy on her staff for approximately 20 years, despite the fact that she was entrusted with the nation’s most sensitive secrets.[6]  Richard Blumenthal from Connecticut was tarnished again for lying about his military service in Vietnam[7]; and the list goes on and on[8].

The Kavanaugh fight may have served another purpose.  It seems to have strengthened the spine of weak-kneed and often pathetic Republican “Neanderthals.”  They rose to the occasion and defeated the onslaught of the Democrats’ lies and normally-astute political skulduggery, which had been so successful in the past.  The departure of the totally-inept and ineffectual Paul Ryan from the House of Representatives may further this progression.[9]

 

© 2018, Timothy D. Naegele

---

[1]  Timothy D. Naegele was counsel to the United States Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and chief of staff to Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal recipient and former U.S. Senator Edward W. Brooke (R-Mass). He and his firm, Timothy D. Naegele & Associates, specialize in Banking and Financial Institutions Law, Internet Law, Litigation and other matters (see www.naegele.com and Timothy D. Naegele Resume). He has an undergraduate degree in economics from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), as well as two law degrees from the School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California, Berkeley, and from Georgetown University. He served as a Captain in the U.S. Army, assigned to the Defense Intelligence Agency at the Pentagon, where he received the Joint Service Commendation Medal (see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commendation_Medal#Joint_Service). Mr. Naegele is an Independent politically; and he is listed in Who’s Who in America, Who’s Who in American Law, and Who’s Who in Finance and Business. He has written extensively over the years (see, e.g., www.naegele.com/whats_new.html#articles), and can be contacted directly at tdnaegele.associates@gmail.com

[2]  See https://www.apnews.com/8234f0b8a6194d8b89ff79f9b0c94f35 (“Kavanaugh is confirmed: Senate Oks Supreme Court nominee”); see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/americas-newest-civil-war-2017-and-beyond/#comment-14894 (“KAVANAUGH: A DRESS REHEARSAL FOR IMPEACHMENT?”) and https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/americas-newest-civil-war-2017-and-beyond/#comment-14821 (“A Hail Mary Pass With 00:07 On The Clock In The Fourth Quarter”)

[3]  See, e.g., https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/05/us-nonfarm-payrolls-september-2018.html (“[U]nemployment rate hits the lowest level since 1969”) and https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/craig-bannister/hispanic-unemployment-rate-hits-lowest-level-record-september (“Hispanic Unemployment Rate Hits Lowest Level on Record in September”) and https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/business/manufacturing-confidence-nears-all-time-high-despite-workforce-shortage (“Manufacturing confidence at all-time high despite workforce shortage”) and https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/federal-government-cut-1000-jobs-september-16000-under-trump (“Federal Government Cut 1,000 Jobs in September; -16,000 Under Trump”) and https://www.marketwatch.com/story/construction-hiring-is-booming-and-there-still-are-plenty-of-available-jobs-2018-10-05 (“Construction hiring is booming — and there still are plenty of available jobs”) and http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_oct05 (“The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows that 51% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance”)

[4]  See, e.g., https://www.yahoo.com/news/sinister-battle-brett-kavanaugh-over-202425923.html (“My sinister battle with Brett Kavanaugh over the truth – by [the international business editor of the UK’s Daily Telegraph] Ambrose Evans-Pritchard”—”[Patrick Knowlton] had been the first person at the Fort Marcy death location [of Vince Foster, next to the Potomac River]. . . . He said the FBI had tried repeatedly to badger him into changing his story on key facts. Each time he refused. . . . Before testifying, he suffered two days of what appeared to be systematic intimidation by a large surveillance team. . . . When Mr Knowlton appeared at the grand jury – thinking he was doing his civic duty – he says he was subjected to two and a half hours of character assassination. . . . There was little attempt to find out what he knew about the Foster death scene. . . . Few people are aware that the US federal prosecutor handling the death investigation at the outset, Miquel Rodriguez, had resigned earlier from the Starr investigation after a bitter dispute. His resignation letter – later leaked [Rodriguez materials] – said he was prevented from pursuing investigative leads, that FBI witness statements did not reflect what witnesses had said, that the suicide verdict was premature, and that his grand jury probe was shut down just as he was beginning to uncover evidence. An informed source told me his work had been sabotaged by his own FBI agents. The nub of the dispute was over compelling evidence of a wound in Foster’s neck, which contradicted the official version that Foster shot himself in the mouth and had essentially been suppressed. The key crime scene photos had vanished and the FBI labs said others were over-exposed and useless. Mr Rodriguez, by then suspicious, slipped them to the Smithsonian Institution and had them enhanced. One showed a black stippled ring like a gunshot wound in the side of Foster’s neck. This remains secret but I have seen it. The photo was pivotal. It confirmed what several people who handled the body had originally stated. I interviewed the first rescue worker on the scene and when I asked him about the mouth wound, he grabbed me, and said with frightening intensity: ‘listen to me buddy, Foster was shot right here,’ jabbing his finger into my neck. He said the FBI had pressured him too into changing his story and that official narrative was a pack of lies”) (see also https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2010/09/24/washington-is-sick-and-the-american-people-know-it/#comment-7185 (“Clinton Fatigue”—”[Was Vince] Foster killed at the Clinton’s behest[, and did Brett Kavanaugh participate in the cover-up]?”))

. . .

Many Americans believe that Chief Justice John Roberts never should have been appointed to the Court; and that he constitutes the second worst decision that former President George W. Bush made, aside from launching our great nation into the tragic Iraq War.  Among other things, he cast the deciding vote with respect to the constitutionality of Obamacare.

See, e.g., https://dailycaller.com/2012/06/28/in-6-3-decision-supreme-court-rules-obamacare-constitutional/ (“IN 5-4 DECISION, SUPREME COURT RULES OBAMACARE CONSTITUTIONAL”)

[5]  See, e.g., https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6245887/Kavanaugh-U-S-Supreme-Court-sparks-harmony.html (“The GOP dream for decades to come: How Kavanaugh could reshape abortion restrictions, gay rights – and may even rule on whether Trump can be prosecuted when he replaces Scotus swing vote”)

[6]  See, e.g., https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/08/01/details-chinese-spy-dianne-feinstein-san-francisco/ (“Details Surface About Sen. Feinstein And The Chinese Spy Who Worked For Her“)

[7]  See, e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/nyregion/18blumenthal.html (“Richard Blumenthal’s Words on Vietnam Service Differ From History“) and https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fact-check-trump-says-blumenthal-lied-he-did-bragged-he-n915096 (“Fact check: Trump says Blumenthal [or “Da Nang Dick” as the President calls him] lied (he did)”—”Senator Richard Blumenthal must talk about his fraudulent service in Vietnam, where for 12 years he told the people of Connecticut, as their Attorney General, that he was a great Marine War Hero. Talked about his many battles of near death, but was never in Vietnam. Total Phony!”—”Blumenthal did lead voters to believe he was a Vietnam veteran when, in fact, he was never deployed to Vietnam”)

[8]  See infra n.2.

[9]  See, e.g., https://naegeleblog.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/it-is-time-for-trump-supporters-to-fight-back/ (“It Is Time For Trump Supporters To Fight Back”)