Skip to main content

4.2 due process

1.The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides, inter alia, that “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law.” This legal standard means what it says. Certainly, Rob Porter and others who have been accused of sexual abuse or harassment are not being deprived of their life or their liberty as a result of the allegations made against them.
2. In short, there is a process — of charges, proof, and judicial decision when a legal action is brought. But when a business, a government entity, or a voter must decide whether someone is fit for his position, the decision process is of necessity much less formal, quicker, and truncated. A judgment call must be made, and it often must be made quickly.
3.It has two prongs: 1) The government cannot charge you with a crime or take other action against you without notifying you of the charges or proposed action. And 2) you must be given the opportunity to present your side of the story to a neutral fact-finder before action is taken.
4.the opportunity to present your side of the story. Remember that due process does not mean you have the right to be believed, just that you have the right to be heard. What the president seems to be arguing is that people are believing the accuser, not the accused.
5.reputable journalists do attempt to hear the other side. They seek confirmation of their stories and solicit a response from the person accused. Recent high-profile allegations seem well-sourced and documented
6. due process as a set of legal principles is different from due process as a range of cultural signals and beliefs. The law of due process is rich and varied, but it generally evokes the right of an individual to be heard before the imposition of punishment or penalties by the government. For a rough guide to legal due process, think about safeguards of the sort found in the Bill of Rights: confrontation of accusers, a burden of proof, an impartial decision-maker, and so forth.
7.Roy Moore is the ultimate example of the use of “due process” as a way of avoiding a question of serious misconduct. Moore and his supporters repeatedly argued that it was unfair to reach conclusions since he has never been charged or “had his day in court.” That is a reference to legal due process. While it is good to remind people that an accusation is not proof, that does not mean that the public is not supposed to reach conclusions on the strength of the available evidence.
8.The Court has generally employed a balancing test to determine whether a specific procedure is required, looking at “[f]irst, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.”
9.
There are two principal strands of due process. One is substantive due process: Most famously, Roe v. Wade is based on substantive due process. The extent to which the Constitution’s due process clauses create substantive rights is always controversial; when a judge is labeled “activist,” it often means that the judge believes in a broader rendering of substantive due process rights.
The other form of due process is procedural due process, which is likely what President Trump referred to. This form requires the government to observe certain procedural protections before depriving a person of life, liberty, or property. The array of protections is wide and often technical, but the core protection is the right to “notice and the opportunity to be heard.” This phrase means that before a judicial deprivation, the government must take steps to reasonably apprise the person of its action, and then give the person an opportunity to appear in court to argue why the action is improper or illegal.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Blog 1: Why the ACLU defends white nationalists' right to protest - including in Charlottesville

1. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) advocates for the freedom of speech for everyone regardless of the "unsavory" topic. The ACLU believes that the First Amendment right to free speech must be a universal right. Although, the ACLU may not agree with the group and topic at hand; nonetheless, it supports their right to exercise freedom of speech. They argue that standing up for free speech in ALL cases is the necessary work for civil rights. Civil rights without the freedom of speech would be shut down completely by those in power. 2. The city of Charlottesville originally tried to revoke the protest permit of the rally organizers, Jason Kessler, and this presents a problem to the ACLU. The ACLU joined the defense team of Kessler arguing that this infringes on his right to free speech. 3.Liberals have supported the ACLU more this year since Trump took office because they vowed to hold the administration accountable in court. 4. The ACLU argues that the government mi...

blog 2.5 Lisa Murkowski

1. (R-AK) Murkowski and Susan Collins (R-ME) 2.  She told Roll Call she would consider voting for the bill if the Senate also passed a bipartisan Obamacare stabilization bill — then walked it back a few hours later. A few days later, she wrote an op-ed for a local newspaper declaring she supported repealing the individual mandate. But then her office said the same day that did not necessarily mean she would support the tax overhaul. 3.a provision that could allow oil drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Natural Refuge. 4. It has been a long-held dream of Alaska politicians for the revenue it would bring to the state. 5.Alaska, one of the states that did expand Medicaid under Obamacare, has seen its uninsured rate fall from 18.9 percent to 11.7 percent under the health care law. While Murkowski is still a Republican, and therefore still has problems with the law, she didn’t want to see those gains reversed. The Republican plans were projected to hit her state, which already has the h...

blog 2.6 Lobbying and tax reform

1.One part of the bill could cost the conglomerate more than $1 billion in new taxes if it becomes law. 2.GE lobbyists scrambled and won an alternative in the Senate’s version of the tax bill preserving the company’s ability to use those losses when calculating its tax liability 3.Foreign airlines including Emirates Airline of Dubai and Etihad Airways of Abu Dhabi are fighting to jettison a provision included in the Senate bill that would require foreign airlines to pay taxes on income earned on U.S. flights in some cases. Delta Air Lines Inc. is lobbying to keep the new tax in the final bill, arguing that it could raise $200 million over a decade. 5. Its centerpiece is a reduction in the corporate tax rate to 20% from 35%. It would also repeal the alternative minimum tax, lower estate taxes and cut some individual rates. It is estimated to cost about $1.4 trillion over the next decade. Republicans say some of the revenue loss would be recouped by higher government receipts fro...