Shuler points to the case as one of the worst first amendment abuses in modern American history. "As Americans celebrate Christmas, I hope they will take a moment to realize their constitutional protections are rotting out from underneath them," Shuler said. "The prior restraint doctrine that grows from the first amendment and is supposed to protect my reporting in this case dates to 1780, and that predates the Lewis and Clark expedition. If our judiciary is so corrupt that it can't get simple constitutional law like this correct, then we are about to become more like Communist China that any of us care to admit."
Shuler points blame for the case squarely at Riley and retired Marengo County Circuit Judge Claud Neilson who was specially appointed by the Alabama Supreme Court to hear the case. "The law is clear for some 230 years that there can be no restraint on publication without a final judgment that the reports are false and defamatory," Shuler said. "In this case there's been no discovery, I've not even been allowed to make an answer to the complaint and there's certainly been no jury or bench verdict on the matter. We have a Yale educated lawyer in Rob Riley who's seeking unlawful sanctions in this case and we have a veteran Alabama judge in Neilson who is granting them. That amounts to all kinds of civil and criminal actions on their part including false imprisonment, obstruction of justice, and deprivation of rights under color of law."
Shuler said Americans should be particularly alarmed that the case amounts to state-sanctioned censorship. That issue was raised in a 1931 case styled Near v. Minnesota that Legal Schnauzer reported on just prior to Shuler's arrest. "The Near case clearly states that prior restraint involves a restriction on publication prior to a final court judgment that the reporting is false and defamatory. That's exactly what has happened here even though Near is the premium case on the subject in the 20th century. It's dumbfounding that I have been held in jail for two solid months over an issue contrary to law that is black-letter in nature and could not be more clear." Shuler added that the best known and recent prior restraint case was called the Dietz case out of Virginia. "In the Dietz case, a woman was unhappy with the work of a contractor in a remodeling job and she expressed her displeasure in an online forum. The contractor sought to have her comments removed from the forums, but a Virginia court found that violated the prior restraint doctrine and said that it could not be done. So even though that case is a 2011 case, it's very clear what the law is and that's exactly what Rob Riley has tried to do is force me to remove reporting without a finding that it's false and defamatory and it's clearly unlawful."
Shuler said state-sanctioned censorship runs counter to most all the constitutional rights that Americans hold dear. "I hope that Americans during this holiday season will take time to ask do they really want the government censoring reporting in what's supposed to be a free press." Shuler said "That's why I've fought this case so hard because it goes at the basic notion of a free press and it tries to bring censorship into the state of Alabama."
Here is a link to an ACLU article about the Dietz case: Prior Restraint Doctrine Protects Negative Yelp Review Against Preliminary Injunction
Here is a link to a previous post on Legal Schnauzer about the Near v. Minnesota case:
Judge in Rob Riley's Lawsuit Violates 230 Years of U.S. Law
http://beta.congress.gov/crec/2013/09/12/CREC-2013-09-12-pt1-PgH5546.pdf
ReplyDeleteyou have to consider, the judicial is the place where Roger has to APPEAL, and the top committee appears not to support the AL tyrannical fascism.
The "Judiciary" are the makers of the 'law'. Appearing to begin to turnaround the Nazism. Judge Leon is amongst the 'Judicial' respected in the US Constitution.
Problem though, is obvious, the 'states' have access to their own private credit flow of Federal Reserve System 'money'.
Roger stands in the U.S. Constitution's Rights' to Free Speech, Privacy, Protection in Home and Papers, Et Cetera.
Credit scoring is owned by Goldman Sachs, Equifax. Think the Riley Clan isn't connected to GS?
Think again, see Roger in jail without any due process rule of law, letter and no spirit other than deadly.
Get a petition to the judiciary, that is the TOP 'law' in America and then the guy who wrote the law for ALL 'lawyers' to follow or be not allowed in the 'judicial'.
May we all see the turning around of this fascist corporatism that has globally taken control of the 'individual right' and made it a cost to get a credit score, PIN in jail, etc.
Royce C. Lamberth, The Federal Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct for Federal Lawyers, finally approved in October 1990, were drafted by Judge Lamberth's Committee ~
ReplyDeleteChief Judge Royce C. Lamberth
Photo: Beverly Rezneck Chambers: (202) 354-3380
Courtroom Deputy:
Mattie Powell-Taylor (202) 354-3184
Court Reporter:
Theresa Sorensen (202) 354-3118
Royce C. Lamberth was appointed United States District Judge for the District of Columbia on November 16, 1987. He became Chief Judge on May 1, 2008.
Judge Lamberth, a native of San Antonio, Texas, graduated from the University of Texas, receiving a B.A. degree in 1966 and from the University of Texas School of Law, receiving an LL.B degree in 1967. He served as a Captain in the Judge Advocate General's Corps of the United States Army from 1968 to 1974. After service at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and in Vietnam, Judge Lamberth served in the Litigation Division of the Office of the Judge Advocate General of the Army at the Pentagon from 1971 to 1974.
Judge Lamberth served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia from 1974 to 1987. He was Chief of the Civil Division of the United States Attorney's Office, 1978 - 1987.
Judge Lamberth is married to the former Janis K. Jost of San Antonio. He is former Chairman of the Federal Litigation Section of the Federal Bar Association, and a member of the American Bar Association and the Bar Association of the District of Columbia, and the District of Columbia Bar.
Judge Lamberth is also former Chairman of the Professional Ethics Committee of the Federal Bar Association. The Federal Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct for Federal Lawyers, finally approved in October 1990, were drafted by Judge Lamberth's Committee.
Judge Lamberth was appointed by Chief Judge Rehnquist to be the Presiding Judge of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court on May 19, 1995. His appointment ended on May 19, 2002.
Judge Lamberth served as a member of the Committee on Automation and Technology of the Judicial Conference of the United States from 1990 to 1996. From 2003 to 2008, Judge Lamberth served as Chairman of the Committee on Inter-Circuit Assignments of the Judicial Conference of the United States.
Judge Lamberth became a member of the Judicial Conference of the United States in May 2008.
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/cpr/discipline/mfrde.authcheckdam.pdf
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/dcd/lamberth
http://www.utexas.edu/law/news/2009/042009_alumni_awards.html
yes, for two months the state of Alabama has continued to violate Mr. Shuler's constitutional rights. Perhaps a press release to some of the newspapers in Alabama and neighbouring states might be in order. An analgy could be drawn between what is going on in Alabama and Egypt, where journalists are being arrested for speaking out. I'd be happy to do it, if I had a list of email addresses for some of the newspapers in the area.
ReplyDeleteI'm retired, the Christmas shopping is done, don't have to cook, there is nothing on t.v., so I might as well write letters to politicians. Finished writing to Canadian politicians last night so I'm good to go with American politicians. As my sister used to say, there is nothing worse than a pissed off senior with time on their hands. She should have added, and a computer which has email.
Merry Christmas to all. have a few days off to enjoy your families and friends.
e.a.f. 12/23/13 @ 1:20 pm
ReplyDeleteI may never meet this individual, Roger Shuler, but nevertheless it will have been for me a rekindling inspiration to have maybe contributed in some minimal venue result of his dedication[s] to equal rights, protections, and due processes, for all tax payers, also their liberties and
freedoms surfacing due Roger Shuler's commitment attempting to make wrongs, righted!
Well, when I was growing up, God was a part of lives in/out church, pride and prestige seen thru the eyes on boys and youths in the servicemen/women; boy scouts, respect for teachers, good manners, and if you had it, was because you worked for it....... No! times then were not perfect either, but so often now I find myself drifting away in my thoughts of times gone by; but time waits for no man.
Roger Shuler's story is the seen floating top of an iceberg, with much larger than can be anticipated; or described, waiting to ripple with edges sharp more than enough to rip open many a legacy built upon the
hopes, dreams, backs, and shoulders of "the little people".
This Christmas, thinking of you, Carol and, Roger I'm reminded of those similar to you although now having gone on before you; but one is left to wonder, what if, had none of them stood and braved to take a stand, that all others benefit[ed] from?
From one elder to another elder.
"The District Attorney was questioning a Kentucky Colonel in court. Unable to shake his testimony, he turned to sarcasm. They call you Colonel, do they not? he sneered. In just what regiment are you a Colonel? Well, drawled the witness, it's like this. The "Colonel" in front of my name is like the "Honorable" in front of yours. It doesn't mean a thing.