Sorry, Dave. I thought your comment implied it was explicit. Good elaboration.
"The Constitution does not explicitly give the Supreme Court the power of judicial review."
Did I say explicitly? No, I said "via". However, since you went there, "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;" Now, while it does not explicitly say "judicial review", it pretty well describes exactly that.
And please note that Marbury was not the first case of judicial review. Marbury was the first case where judicial review struck down a law.
Dave H, you are mistaken. The Constitution does not explicitly give the Supreme Court the power of judicial review. Chief Justice John Marshall, in the case of Marbury v. Madison, ruled a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional, reinforcing the doctrine of judicial review, which had only been a theoretical power before.
According to Wikipedia, "Historians mostly agree that the framers of the Constitution did plan for the Supreme Court to have some sort of judicial review; what Marshall did was make operational their goals."
The irony of the situation is that the provision the court struck down would have expanded the power of the Supreme Court.
"Who gets to decide what the U.S. Constitution really says?
A legal scholar would tell you that's the job of the U.S. Supreme Court. "
When it comes to legal precedent, the US Supreme Court is generally the correct answer -- ironically a power given to them via the U.S. Constitution, the very document they are supposed to interpret and apply.
However, it is really the people of the United States who are the final arbiters of what the Constitution actually says.
Any skeptic of Lyft should try the service first for FREE
1. Download the Lyft app
2. Enter code LOSANGELES (works nationwide)
3. Request and enjoy your FREE ride
4. Repeat on another phone to get home
Does anyone know if this elected official can be impeached?--or maybe just charged with a crime and dragged into court?
CSindyReader, The county is a subdivision of the state, and the elected officials are statutory, or perhaps even constitutional, which means the commissioners cannot make this change on their own. I don't know if a county can opt out of having their local elected officials, such as county treasurer, assessor and sheriff, appointed and not elected. Maybe a reader has a handle on what procedure would be necessary for this to happen.
Sheriffs' departments are notoriously corrupt regardless of whether the person in charge is elected or appointed. The bigger question is why the Republican party chose to continue to back Maketa in light of Pam's story several years ago. The time for partisanship and labeling one or another news organization "conservative" or "liberal," and thus more worthy of being listened to, needs to end for the sake of this city and county.
Should someone with no integrity be in charge of budget, personnel, or criminal investigative issues?
Instead of a recall petition, the county should be considering whether it makes sense in today's world to have an elected official in charge of the Sheriff's department and propose a ballot issue to end the election of a county Sheriff.
What is needed now is a thorough housecleaning, yet the commissioners hands are tied due to an antiquated concept - i.e., electing a sheriff.
The comments made about Miss Piccone by ALC seem very malicious to me and extremely inacurate considering I contacted ALC a few months ago in desperate need of help with a legal mater, ALC would not even give me the time of day after hearing that I could not affford legal help. They talked in there comment about helping so many clients regardless of there abilities to pay,well from my prospective this seems quite confusing considering there brief conversation with me, but then I had the great fortune of meeting Miss Piccone, who I might add is my attorney in my situation. Miss Piccone not only gave me her undivided attention when I contacted her but also out of the kindness of her heart and with great compassion accepted my case saying "Do not worry about the money". Miss piccone does not talk about helping people she just does it.....
Representing a person guilty of abandoning his dog on a mountain sullies your reputation than anything anyone could have said on or off the record.
Ms. Piccone has done remarkable work for all animals, not for the humans that abuse them.
Sorry. I thought the first letter didn't post. (first time posting on Facebook)!
My name is Pamella Kent. My daughter was murdered at her boyfriend's apartment. There has not yet been an indictment in the case but the boyfriend is a suspect. When my daughter died the boyfriend took her dog, Carmella to his mother's house. The dog is not nor was she ever his dog. As legal representative of my daughters estate Carmella should be with me. She may even have been in danger if left with him.
Even though I sought several times to retrieve Carmella with the help of the Arapahoe County Sheriffs Office I was told that this was a property issue and was for the court to decide. The boyfriend was claiming Carmella belonged to him.
Seeking help I was referred by a victims rights advocacy to The Animal Law Center where I spoke with Jay Swearingen. He Charged me a stiff fee for writing an ineffective letter to the boyfriends attorney. He then said he would take my case but that it would be very expensive. More than I could afford. So I went to another victims advocacy who referred me to The Piccone Law Firm.
Juliette Piccone immediately grasped the situation and took my case on a pro-bono basis. Though I have tried to pay her what I could for her services she has never asked for a penny.
Because of Juliette's legal expertise through this lengthy and complicated situation I now have Carmella with me. She has represented me at 4 court appearances, filed many motions and spent many hours of expert legal maneuvering.
The battle is not yet over. The boyfriend still wants the dog. We still have another hearing in the case. But judging by her legal abilities to this point I have every confidence in Juliette. I expect the best possible outcome with her at my side.
My name is Pamela Kent. My daughter was murdered in her boyfriend's home. He has not yet been indicted but he had taken possession of her dog Carmella, and claimed her as his own. As legal representative of my daughter's estate Carmella should have gone to me. After seeking several times to have the Arapahoe County Sheriff get Carmalla back I was informed that this was a matter for the court to decide. So I sought help from a victims advocate who referred me to The Animal Law Center. I then went to their office and spoke with Jay Swearingen. He wrote an Ineffectual letter to the boyfriend's attorney for which he charged what I considered very high for the actual work he did. He said he would represent me in this case but that it would be very expensive. So I contacted another victims advocacy, Rocky Mountain Victims Law Clinic, who referred me to The Piccone Law Firm. Juliette Piccone Immediately saw that Carmella should be mine and that she may even have been in danger if left with the boyfriend. She took the case on a pro-bono agreement even though it has been a complicated and lengthy affair. I have given her what I could afford for her her legal expertise but she never asked for a penny. Through her considerable efforts (4 court hearings, Many motions to the court and many, many hours of legal maneuvering), I have Carmella back where she belongs. There is no one I would rather have at my side during such an emotionally stressed-filled legal situation, trying to protect an innocent little puppy from injustice and a possibly very dangerous situation. Juliette has done every possible thing she could to insure Carmella has a safe place to live, with her rightful owner. The legal battle is not over. The boyfriend stills claims Carmella, and we have another court hearing coming up soon. But I have complete confidence in Juliette's ability as an animal rights attorney and in her compassion for me in these trying times. With her help I know I can expect the best possible outcome for this dog and I.
OUCH someone hit a nerve.....Facts would clear this up and financials usually work but wouldn't that take time away from the important issue "the animals"?? How rude to call someone by their last name and no title.. I am sure Ms Piccone has earned the respect of being addressed like a human and not an object. I am reading between the lines on this one. Talk about pathetic this is a no brainer.,
Wasn't it ALC that represented the man that left his dog on a mountain to die for 8 days and got him what amounted to a slap on the wrist for such actions? I do not see where that is serving the animals at all. If not for the 7 or 8 that went up that mountain and backpacked that dog down, at which time ALC's client wanted said dog back,(luckily he did not get the dog back) the animal would have in fact died but you saw fit to represent a GUILTY man. How does that work?
Jennifer, my comment about my time at The Animal Law Center was meant to be "off the record." And the pit bull cases were contingency with statutory attorney fees if the parties prevailed, not pro bono. I didn't mean to start a war of words with you. God knows we will always have our differences. Juliet Piccone, founder of The Piccone Law Firm, Colorado Animal Attorneys and Animal Attorneys of the Rocky Mountains (non-profit).
We at The Animal Law Center want to clear up a comment in this article made by a disgruntled former volunteer/employee Juliet Piccone. Her statement, that “everything is about the money” at The Animal Law Center, grossly misrepresents what we do and how we operate.
More than 95% of our cases are pro-bono or low-bono, because we operate on a shoe-string budget and strive to serve the public. Each of our highly accredited professional staff members receives far less compensation than our colleagues in the legal field. We make this sacrifice to sustain the firm and to serve the public interest of Colorado, as well as the national animal community. What little revenue is generated is either invested back into the firm or issued as minimal payment for work. Piccone was a beneficiary of some of that minimal compensation. I donate countless hours to legal cases and related causes and have spent the greater part of a personal inheritance to create and build this practice.
One example of the pro or low bono cases we’ve done is a pit bull service dog case out of Denver and Aurora. That recently settled case alone entailed thousands of attorney hours spanning five years. We also represent countless rescues, shelters, and non-profit organizations for little or no money. In fact, we don’t take a normal hourly rate for many of our cases.
Piccone’s indefensible comments constitute a pathetic effort to sully the work we do and they are offensive. It should be understood by all that The Animal Law Center is about animals first – not profits.
Jennifer Edwards, lawyer and founder of The Animal Law Center
Due to comments violating our policies against personal attacks and name-calling, we have disabled the commenting function on this and related stories. Those wishing to have comments published re: this story in our Letters to the Editor section are welcome to submit them to email@example.com.
This is the same budget structure that was voted on for both 2012 and 2013. In both years the budget was passed without structural issues, maintaing the 5 department format.
Regarding stormwater, Mayor Bach has proposed a new regional authority to manage stormwater.
You can read more about it here: http://mayorstevebach.com/mayor-bachs-storm-water-proposal/
All content © Copyright 2014, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation