Year: <span>2023</span>
Year: 2023

Some Updates

Some Updates September 25th, 2023 Hey, greetings everybody. I appreciate your patience as I get this website back to fully functional mode. This has led to a lot of downtime and periods where the website wouldn’t function right. However I now believe I have all the back-end stuff figured that …

Federal Court Smacks Down Civil Asset Forfeiture

Today on Legalese we will be discussing a recent case out of the Sixth Circuit – ‘Ingram v Wayne County’ in which the Court held that when a car is seized under civil asset forfeiture, the owner has a constitutional right to a hearing within two weeks of the seizure.
On top of that encouraging majority opinion, we also discuss the concurring opinion filed in this case by prominent conservative jurist Judge Amul Thapar that takes an even more striking and encouraging position.

First Amendment Beats Police Defendants

Episode #55

Today on Legalese we look at two recent cases that pit private citizens and the First Amendment against qualified immunity and police officers who believe themselves to be above the law.

In Jordan v Adam’s County Sheriff’s Office a man was arrested for criticizing two shitty cops who got very upset when their inflated sense of authority was questioned.

In Bailey v Iles we find a man whose only “crime” was to post a joke on Facebook. Which was considered enough of a crime by the Rapides Parish Police Department in Louisiana to send a SWAT team to arrest him and charge him with violating a state anti-terrorism law.

In both cases the Tenth Circuit and Fifth Circuit Courts of Appeals (respectively) would find in favor of these two citizens while holding the actions of these police to be so unreasonable these officers would not be allowed to cower behind claims of qualified immunity.

Show Notes Page for “First Amendment Beats Police Defendants” –

Federal Court Short Circuits Officer’s Qualified Immunity Defense

Episode #54
A big win coming out of the Fifth Circuit Court Of Appeals in the case of Rogers v. Smith. The Court affirmed that a police officer who deprived a citizen of their first and fourth amendment rights when they arrested that citizen for criminal libel, despite the police’s prior awareness the criminal libel law in question, Louisiana Revised Statutes §14.47 had been ruled unconstitutional by both the Louisiana and United States Supreme Courts.
For these reason the police officers being sued in this case were DENIED qualified immunity and held to have deprived the plaintiff of his civil rights under color of law in accordance with 42 U.S.C. §1983

I also use this case to discuss one of the most common and problematic myths in constitutional law. The writ-of-erasure fallacy. This deals with the crucial distinction between a law that has been ruled unconstitutional by the Courts and the actual repeal of that law by the legislature. The confusion over this legal doctrine frequently has major real world consequences and we discuss what they are.

Show Notes Page for Federal Court Short Circuits Officer’s Qualified Immunity Defense –

Qualified Immunity As Gun Control…. Really?

Episode #53

Today on Legalese we are going to be discussing a new article that will be released in an upcoming volume of the Notre Dame Law Review entitled “Qualified Immunity As Gun Control”.
Law professors Guha Krishnamurthi & Peter N. Salib make one of the most evil and admittedly most brilliant calls ever to further a gun control agenda by using the doctrine of qualified immunity.

This video is based on my article of the same name, recently published to Substack:
Even if you have read the article this video may well be worth a watch anyway, as I have elaborated on certain topics first discussed in the article, such as judicial scrutiny.

Supreme Court Solves Racism

Episode #52

Today on Legalese we will be discussing the Supreme Court’s landmark equal protection clause case dealing with the constitutionality of racially biased admissions discrimination policies on both public and private universities.
The case: Students For Fair Admission v Harvard effectively puts an end to affirmative action in college admissions in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in it’s opinion that the affirmative action policies fail the strict scrutiny standard in every regard.

Follow & Support
Subscribe To Legalese Newsletter –
Legalese Homepage –

Contact Me –

Legalese is a podcast that discusses all things constitutional law as well as current events in politics and other areas of law.

Verified by MonsterInsights