My Head Just Exploded Over This News of the Corruption Of Our Legal System That I Didn’t Know About Because The Media Decided a “Today” Host’s FAMILY CRISIS IS MORE IMPORTANT…!!!

In case you can’t tell, I’m madly disgusted about this, “this” meaning both the episode I’m going to write about, and the fact that I didn’t hear or read about it immediately because of our incompetent, irresponsible news media deciding that their dumb audience would rather share feelings with Savannah Guthrie.

From the New York Times: [Gift link!]

“A former obstetrician-gynecologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, who was convicted in 2022 of sexually abusing patients must be given a new trial, a state appeals court said on Monday, overturning the former doctor’s conviction. The former doctor, James M. Heaps, 69, was sentenced to 11 years in prison in April 2023 after jurors in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County found him guilty of three counts of sexual battery by fraud and two counts of sexual penetration of an unconscious person. U.C.L.A. has already paid about $700 million to settle claims of sexual misconduct against Mr. Heaps, who was affiliated with the university in various roles from 1983 to 2018.

“A three-judge panel on the California Court of Appeal ruled on Monday that Mr. Heaps had been denied a fair trial because the trial judge never told Mr. Heaps’s lawyer or the prosecutors on the case about a note that the jury had sent while it was deliberating in October 2022.

The “Note to Judge” said that a recently seated alternate juror had “expressed to us that his limited English interfered with his understanding of the testimony, resulting in every case being the same, and his mind is already made up.”

Under the California Code of Civil Procedure, people who lack “sufficient knowledge of the English language” cannot serve on trial juries. The appeals court ruled that Mr. Heaps’s conviction must be overturned.”

“We recognize the burden on the trial court and regrettably, on the witnesses, in requiring retrial of a case involving multiple victims and delving into the conduct of intimate medical examinations,” the appeals court wrote. “The importance of the constitutional right to counsel at critical junctures in a criminal trial gives us no other choice.”

The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office said in a statement that it planned to retry Mr. Heaps ‘as soon as possible.’ Mr. Heaps will be sent back to county jail, the office said, and a court could release him on bail.”

I will now pause a bit while you mop your skull and brain bits off your computer screen. I’ve found that Windex does a good job, though you have to pick up the bigger pieces with your fingers.

I Wonder How Often This Happens and In How Many Places…

Nominee for Unethical (and Stupid) Quote of the Decade: Someone At The Grammys, It Doesn’t Matter Who, Since The Audience Erupted In Cretinish Applause…

“No one is illegal on stolen land.”

—Okay, I do know who it was: Billie Eilish, accepting the Grammy for song of the year.

I can’t imagine why anyone would watch the Grammys, and find it even more unimaginable that anyone would care what these under-educated, bubble-dwelling narcissists think about anything, but as usual for this crowd, one after another stepped up to the mic last night and again proved the immortal wisdom of Laura Ingraham’s edict, “Shut up and sing!”

Eilish’s quote is legally, logically, historically and factually absurd, and yet progressives increasingly find it inspiring and persuasive, which should tell you all you want to know about the current state of that ideological malady. Eilish’s nonsense was the most catchy of the many open borders outburst of the night, but there were many others, like…

Fearmongering From The Left and Right, Part II: The Right

The doomsday rant below is the “Morning Report” today on Ace of Spades Headquarters, a lively Far Right blog with five contributors in addition to the mysterious Ace himself (or herself). This entry is written by J.J. Sefton, but the style on this site is very consistent, and I find the various contributors interchangeable in their venom. There is never any pretense of objectivity or balance here, though I often find the rhetoric entertaining. It would be fun to write a blog like this, but unethical. I generally avoid it so as not to be tempted by the Dark Side.

Here is the hard Right’s prediction of looming doom “unless”…

Good morning kids. As I and many of you for sure have pondered lo these many months going on perhaps years now if we are in a state of civil war, but for sure we are in a phase of accelerating societal breakdown. On the surface, life goes on much as it always has, kids go to school we go to work or otherwise go about our routines mostly as per usual. Beyond the violence and mayhem we are witnessing in Minneapolis and elsewhere, the most alarming aspect is the utter breakdown and corruption of our judicial system that has now been infiltrated and weaponized against us.

This here is madness and things like this more than even the open violent insurrection against law enforcement which not only represents President Trump and his policies but is supposed to represent our collective individual and societal liberties, rights and freedoms, will be and are indeed our undoing, in the here and now.

First, Judge Gregory Carro in New York State argued that Luigi Mangione, the leftist terrorist, wasn’t a terrorist because he said he wasn’t.. . . More of the same now at the federal level where Judge Margaret Garnett, a recent Biden appointee, decided that Luigi Mangione stalking Brian Thompson in order to kill him wasn’t a “crime of violence”. . . The only thing tortured and strange here is that Democrats are trying not to pretend that they’re bailing out a leftist terrorist. Had Luigi Mangione worn a red cap and hunted down and killed a liberal judge, all of a sudden all of these rulings would be the opposite of what they are, and the ‘tortured and strange’ parts of them would be the sound of the law creaking to be bent backward the other way.

You better believe that the ICE agents who took down Good and Pretti, should some Soros prosecutor get the ball rolling are going to get the Derek Chauvin treatment if not a cell on death row. Donald Trump and Kristi Noem as well. The DemoKKKrats are already making noises about impeachement should they win back Congress this coming November and beyond that, they are itching to see those two and others dangling from a hangman’s noose.

They’ve learned their lesson. Next time they will completely wipe out all opposition to them and seize absolute power. And anyone who objects will ironically and disgustingly be labeled as a terrorist and insurrectionist, and be subject to the harshest of penalties. Like J-6 the process will only be the beginning of the punishment.

It is clear that the Democrat Left has the ability and the willingness to mobilize an armed force of internal terrorists and insurrectionists who will do their bidding knowing they face no repercussions. At least no repercussions in the legal sense.

Can you imagine if average law abiding and armed citizens had a similar system to communicate and rapidly mobilize to be on scene to counter the criminal terrorist insurrectionists and stand shoulder to shoulder with law enforcement, or to oppose any Don Lemon squad of goons bent on invading a church service?

We are heading down that road. But considering our innate sense of morality (that has been completely burned out of the Left since childhood over the past 60 years or more) and concomitant abhorrence of violence, Perhaps it might never come to armed response.

We as a nation are coming to a crossroads. The Left uses our Constitution as both a shield and a cudgel. And bearing all of the aforementioned in mind, there’s this frightening development:
Democrats spent years pushing for gun restrictions. Now they’re rushing to buy firearms and invoking Second Amendment rights after federal agents killed a licensed gun owner in Minneapolis.

The shift has drawn accusations of hypocrisy from conservative critics. Writing in “The Hill,” columnist Robby Soave noted that progressives “favor all sorts of restrictions on gun ownership” yet now champion constitutional gun rights following Alex Pretti’s death. The ACLU even backpedaled on whether it supports concealed carry rights for protesters, Soave wrote. But, they will acquire and use firearms in an offensive manner and when the smoke clears claim self defense as a judge like the one who let Mangione off the hook and the one who railroaded Derek Chauvin will agree. When you have mayors and governors now openly going after and attempting to impede ICE and other federal agents from doing their duty, no doubt their armed Antifa goons and gang-bangers as in Long Beach CA will be deputized and given the full protection of a bastardized legal system. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) we cannot deny anyone their second amendment right to bear arms based on their political beliefs. But considering a frighteningly large number of individuals not only want to destroy America as founded but as we have seen not just in Minneapolis but since the 1960s are willing and able to use violence to achieve their aims. Worse the Democrat Party in its eternal quest to seize absolute power is giving them political and legal cover to act as their street goons/enforcers.

If by some chance their election rigging machine fails to deliver them control of Congress, what we’re seeing in Minneapolis is just a foretaste of what is to come that will be orders of magnitude worse. The President will be forced to respond and in so doing potentially play into their hands despite being completely in the right to quash an armed violent leftist/Democrat insurrection.

Friend and friend of the blog Mark Pulliam lays it all out in his latest piece, on his blog which is worthy of bookmarking and following:

“. . .What happens if the Republicans lose control of Congress in the mid-terms this November? We don’t have to wonder, because the Democrats have told us. Expect a 180-degree reversal of everything President Trump has done. We can expect as abrupt a change, on a national scale, as the radical onslaught incoming Governor Abigail Spanberger is imposing on the commonwealth of Virginia. Elections truly have consequences.

And if the Democrats re-gain the White House in 2028, things will be even worse. President Trump’s historic victory in 2024, and the MAGA agenda in general, will be foiled by the Democrats’ radical policies . . The Constitution, as we know if, would be shredded.”

And for me it would essentially be the end of even the veneer of the illusion of regular order/business as usual that we barely are able to delude ourselves into believing. They will go all out to seize absolute power, crush any and all opposition and that will be that. A run of 250 years as they traipse around in the skin suit for another century or so demanding respect.

Unless something radical changes the course of history back towards sanity. As we had hoped the election, three times!, of Donald Trump would do.

Have a great day.

Now you have both sides. (Part I is here.) Your assignment: Compare and contrast.

A Sanctuary State By Any Other Name…Will Still Smell Unethical

Democrats truly are addicted to “It isn’t what it is,” or Yoo’s Rationalization. It is this characteristic that has led them so deep into George Orwell territory and why the 21st Century mutation of the party is so untrustworthy. “War is Peace,” and an open border was a secure border, according to Biden’s Secretary of Homeland Security. “Slavery is Freedom,” and President Biden was sharp as a tack even as he descended into gibberish on national TV. And, as we all know, “Ignorance is Strength,” and Kamala Harris was the most qualified Presidential candidate ever, ran a perfect campaign, and only lost because Americans are sexists and racists.

Maura Healy, the Democratic governor of my original home state (which has always been a little bit nuts) really opted in to Yoo’s Rationalization big time this week. She submitted a radical pro-illegal immigration bill to designate schools, hospitals, churches, and courthouses as official “ICE-free zones,” which would have the effect of sharply (and I believe illegally) limiting where U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement can operate in the Bay State.

Healy’s bill would require ICE agents to obtain a judicial warrant before making civil immigration arrests in so-called “sensitive locations,” effectively placing some of the most common public spaces off-limits to routine federal enforcement. I.C.E. agents would have to obtain a judicial warrant before making civil immigration arrests in so-called “sensitive locations,” effectively placing some of the many public spaces off-limits to routine federal law enforcement. The bill would direct state agencies not to allow I.C.E. to use state-owned property for enforcement operations and restrict cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. And the proposed legislation does not distinguish between non-violent illegal immigration cases and criminal offenders: apparently in the Bay State, any illegal immigrant is a Good Illegal Immigrant.

Comment of the Day: “From Uvalde, The Message Is “Don’t Criminalize Incompetence and Cowardice”

I loved this: not only did long-time commenter Red Pill Ethics return to the fold after almost three years, he did it with brio, registering a Comment of the Day! This gives me hope: I periodically take inventories of which regular commenters have fled the nest, leaving me with only five. All I have to do is take the Ethics Alarms wayback machine, also known as “the archives” and peruse the names under “Comments.” I am always thrilled when I discover that an AWOL commenter has been following the blog all along when something rouses them from their torpor. We have had several instances of this lately.

Here is Red Pill’s Comment of the Day on the post, “From Uvalde, The Message Is “Don’t Criminalize Incompetence and Cowardice”

***

Jeez, Conservatives! Ever Heard of the Ethical Virtues Prudence, Proportion, Self-Restraint, Respect and Fairness?

How about “priorities”?

Who would have guessed that Otter would become a conservative? The Rule of Law is under organized, well-funded attack in this country, states are defying federal law and law enforcement, elected Democratic officials are telling citizens that the national government is the Gestapo and should be violently opposed, the news media is paving the way for two years of Congressional obstruction, and conservatives are organizing…against gay marriage?

A coalition of 47 conservative organizations is launching a campaign to challenge the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, declaring same sex marriage to be a civil right. Wow, what great timing. The Democrats are intent on packing the Supreme Court already, the news media is fear-mongering daily about what the Evil Republicans have in store, and just in time for the mid-term elections, which already are looking like an open door to an impeachment orgy and a return to open borders and weenie foreign policies, conservatives decide to metaphorically die on a hill for a cause that is both futile, unpopular and unethical.

Among these deluded obsessives are Them Before Us , the American Family Association, the Colson Center for Biblical Worldview, the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family,the Christian Medical and Dental Association, Live Action, the Ruth Institute, the Council on Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, and family policy nonprofits across the country, representing Alaska, Iowa, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, and others.

This group of bitter-enders should be joining principled conservatives in critical, winnable battles instead of focusing their time, trumpets and resources on an issue that has not only been settled but settled ethically. The right to same-sex marriage cannot be reversed without cruel and massive upheavals of lives and families, never mind giving the Left something else to riot about. Such a movement also guarantees the alienation of libertarians, who already line up with the Left regarding open borders.

The stubborn foes of the right to marry have laid out a three-prong strategy: “returning marriage policy to focus on the parent-child relationship; changing public opinion by emphasizing how same-sex marriage and other forms of family breakdown harm children; and mobilizing Christian churches to take a stand for protecting children.”

Hmmm, let’s see:

Comment of the Day: On the I.C.E. Shooting Ethics Train Wreck ( “Friday Open Forum, Depicated To Major Tipton”)

Ace EA commenter Ryan Harkins, as he often does, flags the ethics conflict in the current escalating controversy over President Trump’s mass deportations, a.k.a, “Enforcing the immigration laws after a rogue Presidency refused to do so for four years.” The point he raises is not only a valid one but an important one, not just regarding this issue but others. I’m going to append a fairly long addition to Ryan’s excellent work, but first of all, here is his Comment of the Day from “Friday Open Forum, Dedicated To Major Tipton…”:

***

Here’s my concern about the situation we’re in. I would liken it to inconsistently disciplining your children. If you only irregularly discipline your child for a particular infraction, the child learns that most of the time, he can get away with that infraction. When that infraction is then punished, the child reactions disproportionately because he’s used to getting away with the infraction, and he believes that if he makes noncompliance painful enough, it will discourage further disciplinary action.

That seems to be the case we’re in with illegal immigrants. We’ve been very poor at enforcing our immigration laws, and so many said illegals and the communities around them grew complacent about the laws not being enforced. When the laws are enforced, it comes as a great shock, and the immediate reaction is to scream about how unfair it is. And to a certain extent, I do agree that it is unfair. It is unfair to cultivate the expectation that a law won’t be enforced, only to turn around and enforce it. But it is unfair because of cultivating that expectation, not because of the subsequent enforcement.

The significant problem is the whiplash effect of enforcement/non-enforcement depending upon who is in charge. We’ve run the gamut of no enforcement (even inviting in illegals), to soft enforcement, to promises of citizenship, to harsh enforcement. To anyone watching from outside the country, it is like dealing with a schizophrenic or someone suffering from multiple personality disorder. Worse, because we keep seesawing back and forth, the expectation right now is that by keeping up a defiant stance against the current administration, illegals and their allies can simply wait for the winds to change and go back to their lives as they’ve been.

I know this aspect of the situation glosses over the deliberate effort of radicals to the destabilize the nation, the outrage over the money spigots that are being closed, the efforts to import in reliable Democratic voters, and the genuine concerns over destabilizing families that had, admittedly against the law, put down roots and became productive members of their communities. But it is a serious problem that we seem to be lurching one direction, and then back the opposite way, with every swing of political power. This has been exacerbated by most policy changes coming from executive orders, which are easily undone, rather than congressional legislation, which is much harder to walk back.

Continue reading

Last Head Explosion of 2025 (I Hope)

Before I post a more substantial essay today I will have to puck the skull pieces and brain bits off of my living room ceiling, carpet, furniture and TV screen after making the mistake of watching CNN’s Abby Phillip show for ten minutes. As usual, her panel of partisan idiots (with the exception of CNN token Republican Scott Jennings) were babbling on with today’s Trump hate. I expected that, but as I routinely switch channels whenever this thing passes my eyes, I did not expect that the level of discourse would be beneath what I would expect late in a cast party when all of the woke actors are half- or totally crocked.

There was no expertise, useful analysis or objective commentary at all, just indignant repetition of Axis talking points as fact: gaslighting, or fake news for the ignorant and gullible. “Trump has used the Executive Orders to get around Congress, and changed the Presidency by doing so!” (Barack Obama openly and specifically established this as a “norm.”) “Trump just defies the Constitution and the Supreme Court lets him get away with it!” (The comment came up regrading SCOTUS taking up the birthright issue, regarding which the Trump administration has made a legal argument, and has not defied the Constitution.) “Yes! It’s just like abortion…” (No, you idiot, it is not “like abortion.” Abortion was never mentioned in the Constitution: an activist Court bent the document out of shape to turn abortion into a right that not a single Founder would have endorsed. Birthright citizenship IS in the Constitution, which is why it is unlikely that the Trump theory will prevail.) “Everything Trump does is to line his own pockets!” (Pure talking point, and one that I read or hear every single day from the Trump Deranged. How does enforcing the immigration laws, purging illegal discrimination against whites and men and trying to dismantle mainstream media and educational political manipulation “line his pockets”? “The economy is in bad shape!” (The third quarter (July-Sept) Gross Domestic Product (GDP) rose by a 4.3% annualized rate, the best in two years, which means that the economy is not in bad shape, but never mind.) And so on. All the women on the panel were wild eyed and angry (this is not professional deportment for television “journalism,” and the men, with the exception of Jennings, sat back and sagely nodded their head,s quickly shutting up if they tried to make a factual correction and were shouted over. Jennings just composed his next articulate rebuttal in his head, and waited for an opening.

Continue reading

Holly Mathnerd Is Right that Effective Gun Control Is Impossible Without Govt. Gun Confiscation by Force, But Doesn’t Everyone Know That?

Right on cue, the Brown mass shooting was instantly the inspiration for the usual gang of anti-Second Amendment zealots, utopians,”Imagine” fans, fact-phobic progressives and nascent totalitarians (funny how they hang out together…huh!) to again scream for “common sense gun control.” Joe Biden did it, or whoever was standing near him barely moving their lips or pretending to drink a glass of water.

Last week, quirky, smart, logic-obsessed substacker Holly Mathnerd issued a typically thoughtful essay called “The Reality of Nationwide Gun Control…the math behind the policy.” Holly gifted me with a subscription to her blog a while back as a gesture of professional courtesy so I pass her analysis on to you. I have written essentially this exact post on Ethics Alarms before and long ago, however, and probably more than once. My reaction to Holly’s work is, “Yes, of course. Why do we keep having to explain this?” Her delivery is a lot less abrasive than mine, so if that helps, great.

Gun control is also on my list of policy objectives that I view as unethical because they are impossible, and arguing for them is 1) a waste of time, 2) misleads the slow of wit into thinking they aren’t impossible when they are, 3) constitute virtue-signaling and 4) would be terrible mistakes even if they weren’t impossible. Read Holly’s whole argument, but the short version is…

If “nationwide gun control” is going to mean anything more than a slogan, it has to be defined in operational terms. Not aspirations. Not values. Mechanics. Logistics. Physical Reality. What specific actions actual humans would have to take with their human bodies in the material world.

In a country with roughly 450 million privately held firearms already in circulation, nationwide gun control cannot mean preventing future purchases alone. Even a total ban on new sales would leave hundreds of millions of existing weapons untouched for decades. So the policy people are implicitly calling for is not regulation at the margin, but the systematic reduction of the existing stock of guns. That requires locating them.

There is no way to meaningfully restrict, reclaim, or eliminate privately owned firearms without first knowing who has them and where they are. Which means a comprehensive national registry: mandatory disclosure of ownership, backed by penalties for noncompliance, with mechanisms for verification. Anything less is symbolic. Once a registry exists, enforcement becomes unavoidable. Some people will comply. Many will not. Some will be confused, some distrustful, some quietly resistant.

That resistance is not an edge case; it is a certainty at this scale. At that point, enforcement ceases to be abstract. It becomes door-to-door. This is the moment where “nationwide gun control” stops sounding like a policy preference and starts sounding like a domestic enforcement regime. Warrants. Searches. Seizures. Follow-ups. Informants. Penalties for concealment. Escalation when compliance is refused.

There is no clean or frictionless version of this process, and no serious proposal pretends otherwise once you spell it out.

Continue reading