NODE 95f13156Re: A Cyberspace Independence Refutation
Dave Farber <farber@central.cis.upenn.edu>Sun, 18 Feb 1996 08:37:58 +0800
The President can not rule anything unconstitutional. He can tell justice
not to enforce it but sometime local federal prosecutors do what they want
and some future administration can decide to enforce it. Only the courts or
the congress can change things for sure.
Dave
At 03:20 PM 2/17/96 -0800, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
>jamesd@echeque.com said:
>>
>>j> 1. President Clinton declared CDA unconstitutional and directed
>>j> the Justice department to refrain from enforcing it.
>
>At 01:57 PM 2/16/96 -0600, Sten Drescher wrote:
>> Then why is the Justice Department defending it?
>
>Sorry: My error. As you pointed out he ruled *part* of the
>CDA unconstitutional -- a part that no one expected to be
>enforced anyway
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> |
>We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
>and our property, because of the kind |
>of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald
>derives from this right, not from the |
>arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
>
>
>
NODE 8bd8527bRe: A Cyberspace Independence Refutation
Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>Sun, 18 Feb 1996 12:40:13 +0800
On Sat, 17 Feb 1996, Dave Farber wrote:
> The President can not rule anything unconstitutional. He can tell justice
> not to enforce it but sometime local federal prosecutors do what they want
U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. U.S. Attorneys
cannot fire their Assistants -- they can only recommend such action to
the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General.
EBD
> and some future administration can decide to enforce it. Only the courts or
> the congress can change things for sure.
>
> Dave
>
> At 03:20 PM 2/17/96 -0800, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
> >jamesd@echeque.com said:
> >>
> >>j> 1. President Clinton declared CDA unconstitutional and directed
> >>j> the Justice department to refrain from enforcing it.
> >
> >At 01:57 PM 2/16/96 -0600, Sten Drescher wrote:
> >> Then why is the Justice Department defending it?
> >
> >Sorry: My error. As you pointed out he ruled *part* of the
> >CDA unconstitutional -- a part that no one expected to be
> >enforced anyway
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > |
> >We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
> >and our property, because of the kind |
> >of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald
> >derives from this right, not from the |
> >arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd@echeque.com
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Not a lawyer on the Net, although I play one in real life.
**********************************************************
Flame away! I get treated worse in person every day!!