pudge's Journal: Judge Steals My Money

A judge in New Orleans is forcing the federal government to pay for something that no law says it must pay for. The judge has no authority to force the federal government to pay for people to stay in hotels. This is telling:

"FEMA cannot assure the court that it will process all or most of the applications of the persons living in hotels and-or motels by Jan. 7, 2006," Duval wrote. "The court is convinced that many persons in the putative class will be irreparably harmed by FEMA's admitted inability to process the pending applications."

So? What's that got to do with the justice system? It may be bad policy, but it is not illegal policy. No law says FEMA has to provide housing until they finish processing the applications.

Bloomberg adds:

"Underlying FEMA's position is a theme that every person ultimately has to take" care of himself, the judge wrote. "That position is unduly callous under the circumstances wrought by Katrina."

You can believe it is "unduly callous," but the law doesn't permit you to rule based on that belief.

The New York Times notes:

The judge said he based his ruling on the federal law that authorized FEMA. It requires the government to ease suffering and damage caused by natural disasters. The arbitrary deadline violates that legislation, Judge Duval wrote, and discriminates against victims based on their economic status.

The government DID ease suffering. The law does not require FEMA to provide help for some specific period of time or to some certain degree; there's no prohibition of an arbitrary deadline, or a goal that must be met before a deadline can be enforced. The judge is just making up what he thinks is fair, which he has no right to do.

And that nonsense about economic status is socialist garbage, completely unsupported by any federal law.

In the end, Duval decides that because he is a federal judge, he can and will rewrite federal law, clearly violating the Constitution, and stealing my money.

Well, OK, technically he is not stealing my money, as he is only ordering FEMA to take my money. If he actually forced FEMA to do it, that would be theft. FEMA does not have to comply, and should not.

He's a federal judge?

[buffer-overflowed]

Then yea, he has authority until it hits appeal. Which it will, and it'll be reversed upon appeal. That's the beauty of the judiciary, you need to be on pretty solid footing(or in the SCOTUS) in order to get things through.

Oh, and on the odd chance it does get held up throughout the appeals process, we can always cancel some Stevens/Byrd pork. That should ease your tax burden.

Re:He's a federal judge?

[FroMan]

Wouldn't it be nicer to get things right the first time instead of relying on appeals correct things?

Re:He's a federal judge?

[buffer-overflowed]

Well yea, but at least appeals are a nice check and balance system that trends conservative in overruling past decisions(unless it's from certain circuit courts). And court challenges are a check and balance system to the legislature.

Hell even the scotus has a check on it via the ammendment process.

I've always found that more comforting than alarming.

Re:He's a federal judge?

[FroMan]

Checks and balances are fine. The concept is great infact. However, I'd like to see things done right the first time. That was my point. It is sort of like smoke detectors, they are wonderful tools that I hope to never have to use.

Re:He's a federal judge?

[jdavidb]

"Ammendment" is spelled "amendment."

Re:He's a federal judge?

[buffer-overflowed]

And "pedantic" is spelled "pedantic".

Re:He's a federal judge?

[pudge]

No it's not. It's spelled "p," "e," "d," "a," "n," "t," "i,", "c."

Re:He's a federal judge?

[jdavidb]

And I care about that charge about as much as you care about the spelling correction.

The real reason I care so much about that word is that it's a misspelling that is strangely common in the arguments of otherwise very well-educated and intelligent people. I'd like for people's arguments to not be unjustly weakened by showing that ignorance.

Re:He's a federal judge?

[buffer-overflowed]

What can I say, I speak english good.

Re:He's a federal judge?

[Chacham]

This judge think he *is* correcting things.

Activit judges, Democrats, what's the difference? They both believe they're right, you're wrong, and you need to be incarcirated until you admit that.

Re:He's a federal judge?

[pudge]

Then yea, he has authority until it hits appeal.

No, he doesn't. A lot of people don't get this, but a judge cannot just tell people to do whatever he wishes, and have it be authoritative. A judge can't tell me to get naked in court. A judge cannot tell the President to go to war, or to bring the troops home. And a judge cannot force FEMA to pay for people when there's no law saying it must.

Oh, and on the odd chance it does get held up throughout the appeals process, we can always cancel some Stevens/Byr

Re:He's a federal judge?

[Miguelito]

A lot of people don't get this, but a judge cannot just tell people to do whatever he wishes, and have it be authoritative.

Exactly. The job of a judge is to apply existing law, not to make up new ones based on what they think the law should have said. This recent phenomenon of judges trying to legislate from the bench is crazy, and the number of people that defend it just amazes me.

Re:He's a federal judge?

[Degrees]

Apropos of not much in all....

I work for local government (well, an outsourcer contracted w/ local government). We had a user's files to move, and ran into an error. Turns out one of the file names was too long for the file server (although Windows created the file just fine in the first place).

The name of the file was: The Court Commissioner has the power under the law to order you to seek work and submit copies of employment applications Orientation script.doc

In this case, the user works for the child