一路 BBS

 找回密码
 注册
搜索
查看: 49|回复: 0

Ted Frank Made His Case Before Supreme Court

[复制链接]
发表于 11-4-2018 12:52:38 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Adam Liptak, He Didn't Have to Look Far for Someone to Argue His Case. New York Times, Oct 16, 2018.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/ ... -supreme-court.html

Quote:

Attorney "Theodore H Frank is [going to argue on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2018 in United States Supreme Court] in the case that bears his name, Frank v Gaos, No 17-961.  He will join a small group of lawyers who have handled the Supreme Court arguments in their own cases. On the whole, they have done rather well."

"In 1998, in a case about the limits of attorney-client privilege, James Hamilton persuaded the court to protect notes he had made of a conversation with a client who later committed suicide. The lawyer on the losing side was Brett M Kavanaugh, who joined the court this month.

"In 2004, Michael A Newdow, an emergency room doctor and nonpracticing lawyer, argued that the phrase 'under God' did not belong in the Pledge of Allegiance, which was recited at his daughter's school. He lost on technical grounds, but only after giving what Linda Greenhouse, writing in The New York Times, called 'a spellbinding performance' made up of 'passion and precision' that elicited applause in the courtroom.

"In 2010, Margie J Phelps, a member of the Westboro Baptist Church, persuaded the court to protect its hateful speech at a military funeral by calmly explaining that the First Amendment required it.

Note:
(a) Regarding quotation 2. Swidler & Berlin v United States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swidler_%26_Berlin_v._United_States
("On July 11, 1993, Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster visited James Hamilton at his home to discuss the possibility of retaining Hamilton as counsel")
(i) Mr Hamilton was with the law firm Swidler & Berlin. Brett Kavanaugh argued in his capacity as Associate Counselor in the Office of the Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr.
(ii) Swidler & Berlin v United States, 524 US 399 (1998).

(b) About Quotation 3. It happens that in June this year, I read that case and thought it was an utter folly on the part of Newdow.
(i) Michael A Newdow (MD UCLA 1978; JD University of Michigan 1988)
(ii) Elk Grove Unified School District v Newdow, 542 US 1 (2004)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2256561478384599461

Quote (citations omitted):

"Each day elementary school teachers in the Elk Grove Unified School District [located in southern Sacramento County; petitioner to Supreme Court] lead their classes in a group recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. Respondent, Michael A Newdow, is an atheist whose daughter participates in that daily exercise. Because the Pledge contains the words 'under God,' he views the School District's policy as a religious indoctrination of his child that violates the First Amendment [separation of church and state]. * * * We conclude that Newdow lacks standing [to file the civil action]

"The Pledge of Allegiance was initially conceived more than a century ago. As part of the nationwide interest in commemorating the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus' discovery of America, a widely circulated national magazine for youth proposed in 1892 that pupils recite the following affirmation * * * In 1942, in the midst of World War II, Congress adopted, and the President signed, a Joint Resolution * * * Under California law, 'every public elementary school' must begin each day with 'appropriate patriotic exercises.' [citation omitted] The statute provides that 'the giving of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America shall satisfy this requirement.

"After the [United States] Court of Appeals' initial opinion [which was in favor of the father] was announced, Sandra Banning, the mother of Newdow's daughter, filed a motion for leave to intervene, or alternatively to dismiss the complaint. She declared that although she and Newdow shared 'physical custody' of their daughter, a state-court order granted her 'exclusive legal custody' of the child, 'including the sole right to represent [the daughter's] legal interests and make all decision about her education' and welfare. Banning further stated that her daughter is a Christian who believes in God and has no objection either to reciting or hearing others recite the Pledge of Allegiance, or to its reference to God." All true -- backed up by California state court record.

* Elk Grove, California
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_Grove,_California (city)

(c) For quotation 4.
(i) Snyder v Phelps
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snyder_v._Phelps
(Snyder v Phelps, 562 US 443 (2011) )
(ii) "Fred Phelps founded the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, in 1955." from the Web.  WBC, "not affiliated with any Baptist denomination," has engaged in the protests at funeral. Frd has 13 children, at least two of whom are practicing lawyers: Margie J Phelps and Shirley Lynn Phelps-Roper (Roper being her husband's surname)..
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news ... rticle24596080.html
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表