This was the headline of an article in the Times the other day:
Jury finds El Paso man guilty of 2005 McAllen murder; he faces prison time
Have we really sunk that low?
We deserve better
Brutus
This was the headline of an article in the Times the other day:
Jury finds El Paso man guilty of 2005 McAllen murder; he faces prison time
Have we really sunk that low?
We deserve better
Brutus
The Times published an article the other day that told us that a grocery store had fired its manager.
The article indicated that the Times does not know why the manager was fired.
Unfortunately the article named the individual.
Was that necessary?
It seems that the store’s sales have not met expectations. That might be news to some but most of us already knew about the issue.
We deserve better
Brutus
Just because we might have the right to do something that does not necessarily mean that we should do it.
Texas law allows city council to go into executive session when it seeks the advice of its attorney about pending or contemplated litigation.
According to their agenda for Tuesday, May 16, 2017 council plans to go into executive session to discuss possible litigation to oppose Texas senate bill 4. The bill would punish local governments that prohibit law enforcement personnel from asking people that they detain about the detainee’s immigration status.
According to a Times article:
City Attorney Sylvia Borunda Firth said during the discussion, posted on the city’s executive session agenda, she will explain the legal implications of the law and share information on current litigation across the state.
The city is being asked to join a lawsuit that opposes senate bill 4, so it is true that litigation might be considered.
There are no circumstances about a particular party that need to be confidential here. The city is not being sued by someone. The city is not in a dispute where it is trying to recover money or property.
The discussion is about policy and whether or not to spend money to object to the new state law.
We should be able to hear what the city attorney and the people at the meeting have to say.
We deserve better
Brutus
According to the Times a lawsuit has been filed claiming that Texas state senate bill 4 violates the 10th amendment to the United States constitution.
It makes sense that some groups are opposed to bill. What would make even more sense is if they based their objections on an argument that they can win.
The wording of the 10th is:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Evidently one of the statements in the lawsuit is “SB4 supports otherwise to wrest this autonomy from local governments…”.
The 10th does not address the autonomy of local governments. That is done in our state constitution.
Our state government has powers over our local governments just as our feral government has powers over the various states.
The lawsuit is basically asking a court to declare that state governments have no power over local ones. Chaos would be the result if that were to happen.
The Times did not mention this. Maybe everyone involved should read our constitution.
We deserve better
Brutus
The Times is not doing well.
We heard the other day that on some days less than 9,000 newspapers are bought.
They have been promoting their on-line version.
Yet it seems that even there we have more immediate sources of news available to us.
Take a look at this graphic.
Two local TV stations delivered the horrible news to us faster than the Times.
Is there any hope for the Times?
We deserve better
Brutus
You must be logged in to post a comment.