Freedom is Scary: The Civil Rights Lawyer

thejohnbryanpodcast

The Civil Rights Lawyer from YouTube: West Virginia Civil Rights Lawyer, Political Scientist, 2nd Amendment Advocate, History Buff.... Commenting on issues of constitutional law, from the perspective of a lawyer who makes a living investigating and suing the government over police misconduct and freedom issues. read less

Should RBG be Replaced Now? - a Lawyer's Perspective - Freedom is Scary, Ep. 15
Sep 22 2020
Should RBG be Replaced Now? - a Lawyer's Perspective - Freedom is Scary, Ep. 15
My thoughts on the Ruth Bader Ginsburg drama. There are 3 currently living retired Supreme Court justices: Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy, and David Souter. Each of these still-living former justices chose to retire, rather than to remain on the bench until death. RGB was perhaps the most partisan justice ever to serve on the Court, so understandably, she made the purposeful choice to stay on as long as possible. Therefore, it was her choice to politicize the vacancy which would be created by her death. In fact, her last words, as relayed by her granddaughter, were purportedly, “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”   First of all, presidents are elected – not installed – and secondly, the seat belongs to the American people. It never belonged to her. It’s not her seat; it’s not the Democrats’ seat; it’s not the left’s seat; it’s not the right’s seat; it’s the people’s seat. There can be no doubt that the Constitution provides the that the President is tasked with nominating someone new to fill the vacancy, subject to the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate. The only issue is the timing.The Constitution doesn’t necessarily provide, or require, that federal judgeships last until “death,” per se, but just that appointments are for “life.” What does the Constitution say about this?   Read more: https://thecivilrightslawyer.com/2020/09/21/should-rgb-be-replaced-before-the-november-election/
Freedom is Scary No. 3 - BJJ Training and Police Use of Force
Aug 18 2020
Freedom is Scary No. 3 - BJJ Training and Police Use of Force
Excessive force issues may never be the same after the George Floyd death. Many states have enacted legislation now prohibited so-called "chokeholds," and Trump's Executive Order directed states to do so. In this livecast I'll discuss this, as well as the application of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu training with my buddy, Adam Martin, who is not only former law enforcement, but a BJJ coach, practitioner, and competitor. Why? Because ever since the death of George Floyd, “chokehold” has been the word of the day. Trump brought them up in his June 16, 2020 Executive Order, and now many states have issued orders, or enacted legislation, banning the use of so-called “chokeholds” by police officers. The problem is, that the term doesn’t mean what they think it means, and in doing so, they’re changing the rules of self defense for police officers. As with other civil rights, if you allow it to be done to one group of people, it always grows like a virus to include groups of people who were not intended to be affected. In this video we discuss what that means. On June 16, 2020, President Donald Trump (R) issued an executive order, titled Executive Order on Safe Policing for Safe Communities, addressing changes to policing on June 16, 2020.The order directed the U.S. Department of Justice to create an independent credentialing body that would develop a set of criteria for state and local law enforcement agencies to meet in order to be awarded federal grants. The order stated that the criteria should address excessive use of force, include de-escalation training, and ban the use of chokeholds, except when the use of deadly force is lawful. https://thecivilrightslawyer.com/2020/08/07/bjj-and-police-use-of-force-freedom-is-scary-livecast-no-3/ Check out my blog at https://thecivilrightslawyer.com