Facebook
Google
GitHub
Linkedin
https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/barnes-v-felix/
Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23-1239 | 5th Cir. | Jan 22, 2025 | May 15, 2025 | 9-0 | Kagan | OT 2024 |
Every once in a great while something good happens in the world
- Thread starter spinnaker
- Start date
https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/barnes-v-felix/
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/05/us/politics/supreme-court-mexico-gunmakers.html
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a lawsuit by the Mexican government against U.S. gun manufacturers that attempted to hold them responsible for drug cartel violence.
In a unanimous decision written by Justice Elena Kagan, the court held that U.S. legislation that shields gun makers from liability in certain cases barred the lawsuit. Mexico, she wrote, had not plausibly argued that American gun manufacturers had aided and abetted gun dealers’ unlawful sales to Mexican drug traffickers.
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a lawsuit by the Mexican government against U.S. gun manufacturers that attempted to hold them responsible for drug cartel violence.
In a unanimous decision written by Justice Elena Kagan, the court held that U.S. legislation that shields gun makers from liability in certain cases barred the lawsuit. Mexico, she wrote, had not plausibly argued that American gun manufacturers had aided and abetted gun dealers’ unlawful sales to Mexican drug traffickers.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g2kdg70rko
Graveyard chance encounter leads to family meeting
A "divine intervention" has led to two families from either side of the Atlantic meeting by chance at the gravestone of their great, great, great, grandfather.
Rand and his wife Janeel Smith had travelled from Kansas City, USA, to Raunds, Northamptonshire, on Monday, to see where his ancestors hailed from.
While in St Peter's churchyard they stumbled across two other people, also visiting the same spot — cousins Ian Brandon and Malcolm Atkins from Essex.
After chatting they discovered they were actually fourth cousins and all related to Anthony Smith.
Graveyard chance encounter leads to family meeting
A "divine intervention" has led to two families from either side of the Atlantic meeting by chance at the gravestone of their great, great, great, grandfather.
Rand and his wife Janeel Smith had travelled from Kansas City, USA, to Raunds, Northamptonshire, on Monday, to see where his ancestors hailed from.
While in St Peter's churchyard they stumbled across two other people, also visiting the same spot — cousins Ian Brandon and Malcolm Atkins from Essex.
After chatting they discovered they were actually fourth cousins and all related to Anthony Smith.
While the odds of something like that happening are extremely small, they happen all the time (because there are so many opportunities for them to happen).
I've had a few of them.
On vacation once, going from Denver to Phoenix (so heading south on one highway), we stopped at a rest stop for about twenty minutes (just long enough to use the bathroom and grab a snack from the vending machines). When we were getting back in the car, another car pulled in right next to us and it turned out to be our next door neighbors, who had been on an extended road trip and were coming from Florida and headed to California (so going east on the crossing highway).
But my most extraordinary one was when I was getting my pilots license. The night before I was scheduled to take my written, I spent all night at a Village Inn studying and, when I left, I accidentally left my aeromedical certificate (which is also your student pilot's license) on the table. I realized it a few hours later, but by then the trash dumpsters had been picked up. I was devastated, because I was almost ready to solo and I was up against the clock on being able to complete my pilot's license before I had to report for active duty.
So I called the FAA's Aeromedical Branch (this was in 1985, so no online or e-mail options) and gave the person my full name, including middle name, and date of birth. He pulled up my records and asked me to confirm the date that I had taken my medical. It sounded off, but was close enough to what I recalled that I thought it was correct. He said that they could send out a replacement, but it would be at least two weeks. I explained my situation and he actually authorized my instructor to endorse the cover letter that had accompanied my medical certificate for use as a temporary student pilot's license until the replacement arrived. He then confirmed my address, but gave me one in St. Louis, MO. When I told him I lived in Denver, CO, he read back my full name and date of birth. I confirmed that that was correct. He then read my social security number, which wasn't even close. I gave him mine and after a small pause he goes, "Wow! There is another person with your same name and date of birth that took their medical exam within a couple weeks of you."
But it gets weider.
While I was in basic training, one of my squad mates came up and asked if I had any relatives in St. Louis. I said, "No, but I happen to know that there's someone there with my same exact name and birthday." He said, "That's why I asked. I went to high school with him."
The other guy became a professional pilot (that information used to be public from the FAA). I think I found his LinkedIn profile and tried to contact him, but never heard back.
I have at least 6 generations of ancestors interred here in our local Episcopal Church cemetery. Can't remember exactly why we were in the cemetery that day but probably cleaning family graves. An elderly gentleman happened by and we introduced ourselves. He was passing through and had stopped to visit the family graves. He went on to explain that his father that was buried there had been a local grocery store owner but had gone out of business when the dastardly local timber company had closed its doors and also shut down its nearly 30 sawmills throughout 3 coastal counties without any noticed given to the public. I quietly listened to him ranting and raging against the Hilton Dodge Timber Company and how it had ruined his family's fortunes. My great grandfather had been the Secretary Treasurer of the Hilton Dodge Timber Company and from this elderly gentleman's ranting I knew exactly which store his father had owned. You see when school ended for the day my grandfather and the other kids would stop by his store on the way home to get penny candy and such. One day the owner had accused my grandfather of stealing from his store and bodily threw him out of the store. My grandfather was very upset as he had never taken anything from the store that he hadn't paid for and his father found out about the kerfuffle. He had his horse and buggy readied and rode into town to the man's store to discuss the situation with him. The man got very loud and abusive and my great grandfather accused him of lying. One thing lead to another and the upshot was that my great-grandfather being a pillar in the local business community took umbrage with his son being accused wrongly of stealing so he had applied quite vigorously his buggy whip on the ungentlemanly lout. Yep, I knew who the man's family was. But I held my tongue and let the elderly man go peacefully about his ways.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...-by-manufacturing-them-in-the-u-s/ar-AA1NTbkZ
Sharpie Found a Way to Make Pens More Cheaply—By Manufacturing Them in the U.S.
Sharpie Found a Way to Make Pens More Cheaply—By Manufacturing Them in the U.S.
The numbers make me scratch my head. They make half a billion Sharpies a year that sell for $1 each (in a pack). They invested $2 billion to move production to the U.S.
Net profit in high-volume consumer products like this tend to be in the 5% to 10% range. Let's call it 10%, which means their net profit is about 10 cents per pen, or $50 million per year. So that $2 billion investment would eat their entire profits for forty years.
They lose money on every Sharpie sold, but they make it up through volume.
I would think that tax incentives help to make the deal and tariffs on imports help.
You are a mathematics wizard!
The one he missed.
https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2025/07/man-killed-in-north-portland-shooting-identified.html
Last edited:
While I'm personally satisfied with the verdict, it was probably the wrong one from a purely legal standpoint. Once he was out of the shop, he was no longer under an imminent threat of death or grievous bodily harm and, again from purely legal standpoint, was probably the aggressor when he reinserted himself into the situation. So, the prosecutor was probably correct in filing charges and he lucked out in getting a jury that exercised some rationality.
That aside, it was still very questionable judgement for him to act as he did. I have zero sympathy for the criminals that lost their lives, but he placed himself (and others -- he was standing outside the store and imagine where some of the bullets might have ended up had the robbers returned fire through that window) at risk in order to protect property; there was no self-defense justification at that point. Still, I would have voted to acquit.
The purely legal standpoint in the state of Oregon is why there was a not guilty verdict. Easy to justify.
Oregon law is very clear.
Oregon law is very clear.
I won't risk my life protecting a work property but it is perfectly legal in Oregon to do so when three armed thugs are robbing the place, even if you leave and come back.
I don't think it is as clear as that. Had he turned on them and fired before leaving the building, no question. But once he was out of the building, the threat of imminent force argument becomes weak. His defense centered on the claim that he didn't run away because he feared that he might be followed and shot -- yet if they had intended to shoot him, why didn't they do so instead of letting him leave? I think the verdict could have gone either way.
He never left the property before the shooting and per Oregon law, leaving the building means nothing. In Oregon, it would have been very unusual to be guilty of murder in a case like this.
https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_161.225
Use of physical force in defense of premises
(1)
A person in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in using physical force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or terminate what the person reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon the premises.(2)
A person may use deadly physical force under the circumstances set forth in subsection (1) of this section only:(a)
In defense of a person as provided in ORS 161.219 (Limitations on use of deadly physical force in defense of a person); or(b)
When the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the commission of arson or a felony by force and violence by the trespasser.(3)
As used in subsection (1) and subsection (2)(a) of this section, “premises” includes any building as defined in ORS 164.205 (Definitions for ORS 164.205 to 164.270) and any real property. As used in subsection (2)(b) of this section, “premises” includes any building. [1971 c.743 §25]
Last edited:
Integrity. The keyword here is integrity. What's the point of playing any game if its aim is not truth itself?:
To be sure, there are still bastions where integrity and character are taught and expected, but you don't get the kind of unanimous agreement to return the trophy, despite league rules saying that it was theirs to keep regardless of any errors in scorekeeping, unless those girls were in an environment where it was not only given lip service, but where it was modeled day in and day out by teachers and staff that had earned their respect.
