What does it mean if the DOJ refuses to defend the constitutionality of banning preexisting conditions? Are judges bound by limiting their decisions to the arguments presented in the courtroom, like the way admissible evidence works? If the defense isn't made, is it an automatic win for the other side?
(The diaresis kept the "ee" from being confusing.)
As suggested by Will, depression really is so awful. My one association with Bourdain is this clip from Yo Gabba Gabba, which is only the 10 second part starting at 3:09 (and the link should go there) and his delivery of the line, "That's right, Tootie, I am." It's so charming and likable that it became my sole source of why I liked him.
I don't have any associations with Kate Spade, but it's startling to have both tragedies just days apart - super competent, successful public figures in their 50s and 60s who are masking such devastating mental illness.
Mossy Character sends in this, about the forced sterilization in Japan until 1996.
The state has not apologized or provided compensation to the around 25,000 people who were sterilized due to mental or other illnesses under the law, which remained in force until 1996, saying it was legal at the time. Of the total, 16,500 people are believed to have undergone the surgery without their consent.
Now they're being sued by a woman in her 60s who was part of the forced sterilizations.
Court documents show the woman developed mental problems following cleft palate surgery in 1958 and was diagnosed with an intellectual disorder at age 15 in 1972.
After undergoing sterilization based on the decision of a local review panel, the woman suffered stomach pains, and a number of marriage proposals were withdrawn once the suitors discovered she was unable to have children, the documents said.
That's pretty horrible!
This article on how a Stanford professor launched the campaign that took down Judge Aaron Persky yesterday is a good read. He's the Brock Turner judge, which was alleged to be part of a larger pattern of leniency:
To convince voters that Persky was unfit for the bench, Dauber knew she needed to demonstrate that Turner's sentence was not an isolated bad decision. Her teaching assistant, a graduate student named Emma Tsurkov, was also working on the recall. Dauber asked her to dig into the previous 18 months in which Persky had been hearing criminal cases. Tsurkov found some cases that appalled them both. In 2015, Ikaika Gunderson, an aspiring 21-year-old football player, had beaten and choked his girlfriend, then pushed her out of a parked car. Gunderson pleaded no contest to a felony count of domestic violence. Persky agreed to delay Gunderson's sentencing for a year so he could attend school at the University of Hawaii and try out for the football team, provided he took a domestic violence class and attended weekly AA meetings. Robert Chain had been caught with child pornography, including an image of an infant being penetrated. Chain had expressed remorse and pleaded guilty. He got off with time served: two days in jail. In 2016, Keenan Smith, a football player at the College of San Mateo, was convicted of domestic violence after hitting his girlfriend and punching a bystander who tried to defend her. After he pleaded guilty to misdemeanors as part of a plea deal, he was sentenced to 120 days in a weekend work program.
To Dauber, it was evidence of a damning pattern. "He's very interested in what will work for the abuser and it's really to the exclusion of the victim," she said. "As far as I can tell, he doesn't see her."
Dauber sounds like a very intense person, and has become a black sheep at Stanford.
Dauber's critics in the California legal community have pointed out that four cases are not evidence of a pattern. Moreover, where Dauber sees Persky favoring male defendents, they see a judge rubber-stamping plea deals struck between the district attorney and the accused--a standard procedure in which the judge has little agency.
Also I'm only halfway through the article, but that's still a lot, for me.
Updated - Well, I'll tack on one more fitting quote near the end of the article, now that I've gotten to it:
Last year, Dauber proposed turning the site of the assault into a small seated garden with a plaque quoting from Emily Doe's statement, the words that had launched a movement. Stanford was open to the idea, but the project stalled over a disagreement between Dauber and Stanford over which quote to use. One of the quotes Stanford had suggested was "I'm right here, I'm okay, everything's okay, I'm right here," which Dauber felt missed the point entirely. Negotiations broke down, the fight spilled into the national media and no plaque was installed.
CharleyCarp suggests, "Maybe our friends in California could use a thread to tell what all went on last night? Montanans too."
Trivers writes: This is a great article by Melissa Del Bosque about how, over the last ten years, our government has been ramping up militarism and surveillance at the border, and how it's transformed the lives of the people who live there.
In 2016, a similar hidden camera caused controversy after several Border Patrol agents and DPS troopers were dispatched to a baseball game to interrogate a woman and her 5-year-old son about their immigration status. The incident was recorded and uploaded to YouTube, where it quickly went viral. Months later, the ACLU discovered that the agents had been tipped off by a DPS camera covertly planted in the brush near the baseball field. Since the bathrooms were closed, the woman had taken her son into the bushes, triggering the motion-activated camera.
Heebie's take: Jesus christ:
Hidalgo and Starr counties are now among the most profiled and surveilled communities in America, with residents forced to adjust to life under the persistent watch of aerostat surveillance balloons, observation towers, National Guard listening posts, drones, DPS surveillance cameras, DPS spy planes and a barrage of intrusive police stops.
It sounds like a military state all right.
Do you all have Melania opinions? I mostly don't, but I do generally enjoy gossiping as a pastime. (I did love the article about her instagram account from last year that was linked here, then.)
I'm trying to concentrate on some new projects and finding it hard to maintain concentration. Not that I'm bored and seeking out the internet pellet bar so much as that I'm feeling wildly scatterbrained and can't seem to pursue a single thought to completion, without being hijacked by five other thoughts and bouncing around ineffectively.
I'm starting to wonder if I've fried my brain's ability to concentrate on projects (aside from my old established things that I'm used to concentrating on) probably by too much internet. Is this what people mean when they start to panic about the effect of technology on their brain? How do you fix this?
(I know "monkeybrain" is the phrase used in conjunction with meditation, suggesting that meditation is the cure. Perhaps, but I usually think of that kind of monkeybrain being more laced with anxiety and worry. This is just having a hard time organizing my thinking on interesting topics.)
Minivet writes: Are we back in the housing bubble with subprime and CDOs under new coats of paint, or am I overinterpreting this article?
Heebie's take: I have 100% confidence in the speculative destructiveness of the finance industry. I'm agnostic on whether or not this is the biggest vehicle that they're driving off a cliff at the moment or not.