Aren't they still trying to force the retention of DACA through the federal judiciary?

Man, Moral Dilemma. I would explain situation for the man who is falsely accused and then ask him what he wants, then I would take into consideration how bad the charges before I decide.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqcA4AxiavQ

Mark, republicans are also power hungry - it is just I think personally what Republicans do with their power is not as bad as what dems do with their power

The federal judiciary is in need of a massive smackdown.

If the 10 who are guilty have series crimes, I would keep innocent man in prison. But if the crimes are not very bad, I would release the man.

Mostly because of democrat judges.

The ninth circuit is overruled almost 90% of the time.

I would explain it to the man... so he understands, then have him released on good behavior later and afterwards clear his record.

The Ninth Circuit needs to be nuked from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Mark, you know the quote from Thomas Jefferson?

My big fear is that the democrats are going to stump for this idea of 'annulment', in which case judicial appointments would be annulled as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_formulation

oh no it is not quote from jefferso

There's no such thing as 'annulment', unless you mean Trump annulling Obama's legacy of EO's.

though I'm sure he said it

The innocent man I would give him a light sentence, like 1 year prison time, then release him on good behavior in month and half before clearing his record.. As for the 10 who are guilty, I would punish them with the full book.

I know there is no such thing as annulment, but I think they're going to manufacture it.

> Other commentators have echoed the principle; Benjamin Franklin stated it as, "it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer"

> It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished.... when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, 'it is immaterial to me whether I behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security.' And if such a sentiment as this were to take hold in the mind of the subject that would be the end of all security whatsoever

<http://robertreich.org/post/177349093095>

They will manufacture *anything* if it means power.

I would work with the law to get the man the lightest sentence and have his record exponged.

If I have no choice to place a innocent in prison to keep the 10 guilty in prison.

MArk> Abraham drew near, and said, "Will you consume the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous within the city? Will you consume and not spare the place for the fifty righteous who are in it?[2] ... What if ten are found there?" He [The Lord] said, "I will not destroy it for the ten's sake."[3]

I'm watching very carefully for public figures on the left dropping the word "annul" or "annulment" with respect to Trump. If you see more and more celebs, commentators, politicians, etc use the word you know they're trying to give the concept legitimacy.

Is that a good choice?

Atkins they cannot do anything without legislative power to do it

Moral Dilemma by Timcast was you free innocent man and 10 guilty accused of sexual misconduct or keep innocent in prison with the 10 guilty for sexually misconduct. I would put innocent man in prison with light sentence after explaining to him while putting harsh sentences with the 10 guilty, then release man on good behavior after a month before expunging his record. I have a feeling the innocent man would agree with me since I have no choice.

Atkins but once they have that power they will do it

What would you guys do?

@Mark I would adhere to blackstone's formulation as I quoted above I think

Well I am thinking outside the box.

If I can't do that, I would not put him in prison because I don't want to be responsible for ruining a innocent man's life.

Mark, hard cases make bad law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_cases_make_bad_law

Mark, the principle is one of the foundations of liberalism

and liberalism in the sense of liberalism not leftism

Liberals are against it now.

Since Trump is for it.

Mark, they are not liberals 😉

Well the modern liberals, not classical liberals.

Classical Liberals are cool.