The Senate confirmed Ketanji Brown Jackson as the 116th justice of the United States Supreme Court. [SCOTUSblog]
State lawmakers allocated $250 million in federal aid to affordable housing. [TNI; Nevada Current]
Gambler RobinHood702 aka Robert Cipriani has bail revoked for tweeting. [RJ]
As CCSD is about to begin spring break, chool violence is a trending topic. [RJ; 8NewsNow; Las Vegas Sun]
Speaking of spring break, what kind of travel are you doing this year? Are covid/gas prices/inflation impacting where you go or what you do for vacation?
Justice Jackson may be the most qualified person to ever serve. I have no idea. But what I do not think is helpful is that her nomination is perceived to be because of her skin color. I think we should always pick the most qualified and when we do not it hurts the person who is supposedly the beneficiary. I believe any form of affirmative action hurts the people it is supposed to help. I think it is simply a way to make (usually white people) feel like they are doing something. Just my 2 cents as no one else is posting. I hope she serves with honor.
I have not heard anyone claim that she is "the most qualified person to EVER serve." What I have heard is: "SHE IS HIGHLY QUALIFIED TO SERVE." Two things can be true at the same time: that she is both highly qualified to serve as a Supreme Court Justice and that she is the first black woman to serve as a justice. Both things can be celebrated, as they are. The people who have issues with this … have issues.
OP back. I apologize for not being articulate and leading to your misunderstanding. By Biden saying he would pick a woman of color, it gives argument to those who say she does not deserve the position and got there by skin color. I ask: Why couldn't he just say I'll find the most/best qualified and it happens to Justice Jackson. My point is that the way Biden did it undermines the actual person he is trying to help. Or am I wrong?
Let's not forget that there may have already been a black woman (Judge Janice Rogers Brown) on the Supreme Court had then-Senator Biden not pledged to filibuster her nomination … amazing how some things come full circle
I think it's important to keep in mind that there are a lot of lawyers, jurists, and academics who are qualified to serve on SCOTUS for one reason or another. In truth, I don't think anyone has a set of skills that makes them "most qualified" because peoples' backgrounds have different facets that serve them in different ways while on the bench. Justice Sotomayor is, I believe, the only person to have been a district judge; Justice Barrett was an academic for the majority of her career, and I think there's significant value in that, too. In some ways, the decision of who to pick is arbitrary because there are many people who are qualified and will do a fabulous job, including many black women and white men. Accepting all of that, I don't think there's anything wrong with consciously selecting someone from a demographic background that has traditionally been excluded from the Court. Did Biden's stated goal give others an argument to say that Judge Jackson does not deserve the position? Yes, of course. That doesn't mean those arguments are correct.
OP once again. Thank you to all for the civil answers. It proves we can discuss "touchy" subjects and keep it civil. Thanks to blog master for letting us proceed.
I agree with the point at 10:53. Biden should've just picked Jackson and said it was because she was qualified. That would've been accurate and not signaled that she was selected with the aid of AA. By first narrowing the pool of potential applicants, Biden sent the message that Jackson may not be the best, but that she'll do. I think Jackson is a great choice, and I believe (and hope) that her tenure on the court will prove me right.
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2022 6:26 pm
Is there something more going on with this Robinhood702 story? Seems like pretty small potatoes for two separate criminal prosecutions
While I often find her to be a tad shrill, Dana Gentry in the Current has been following it closely and raising some eyebrows about why Wolfson might had it out for RobinHood. The story has strong elements of insider justice Vegas-style.
Is corruption inside Vegas and it's politicians, judges, attorneys, Casino operators, District Attorney Steven Wolfson, his asst DA's and shady attorney David Chesnoff a big surprise? I think not. It's only a matter of time when the DOJ, FBI and Attorney General's office, will rise up and finally investigate and prosecute these criminals dressed as upstanding citizens and politicians.
Corruption in Vegas has been going on for decades and decades.
WTF is taking so long?
The circle jerk of Las Vegas.
They all protect each other.
Absolutely disgusting!
Real upstanding Citizens of Las Vegas should rise up and say "ENOUGH" and vote these pathetic clowns out of office!
Let's start 2022 and VOTE for Ozzie Fumo!!!
Ozzie can start cleaning up Las Vegas and prosecute the real criminals of Las Vegas….. their own inner circle!
Dana Gentry with the Nevada Current has alot of fortitude to report and expose all these corrupt politicians and judges and Casino operators. Why isn't the national press like WSJ and NYT doing the same?
They don't care like Dana cares!!
She was born and raised in Las Vegas and wants to hold people in office and beyond accountable for ALL their actions especially when those perverted actions are self serving or come with an agenda that helps only their connected friends in positions of power. Bravo Dana
Looks like the fix is in for Robinhood702. He pissed off the Money Machine players of Las Vegas. Anyone with half a brain could see Judge Baucum is part of the fix against him. Shuts off Bluejeans feed on purpose so no one could see or report on her shady hearing where see protected Robert Alexander a guy who defrauded millions from investors. Thank God the Review Journal was there to report on what craziness went on, including DA adding two more felony charges to an already bogus case for taking a phone and giving it to security.
Attorney General needs to step in and investigate.
These corrupt people need to be help accountable.
Bill Maher explained that he believed Twitter has gotten so ingrained into our lives and daily discourse, that it could no longer ban users as it would amount to suppression of free speech. 'We live in a different age where Twitter is the public square now,' Maher said. 'If you deny someone's right to speak on Twitter, you're basically saying you don't have free speech rights. I think that's what Elon Musk wants to fix at Twitter.'
Shutting off/kicking people out of BlueJeans is an interesting conundrum. This is not a family court hearing that is sealed; this is a public hearing. Furthermore I looked this morning and Gentry put in a Media Request for Electronic Coverage (same thing RJ did) but Gentry was kicked out.
Judge Suzan Baucum and Asst DA Zadrowski were apparently holding their own KANGAROO COURT adding more BS charges and didn't want the press or anyone knowing what they were about to do to silence this innocent until proven given guilty defendant.
This stuff happens every day in Corrupt Vegas justice system.
If David Chesnoff was his attorney he would have never been charged.
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” H.L. Mencken
As to CCSD, what's the deal with the Board of Trustees comprised of mainly women adopting a program called DADS, that recruits men to keep an eye on the campuses for our kids. The concept is good but seriously an organization that appears to discriminate against Women was adopted by the school board comprised of women.
CCSD – is long running continuing joke.
Spoke to a 16 year old recently. I learned that some kids thinks it makes them look tough and cool to jeer and name call police. Extra points for striking another kid and having police come to the school.
The kids know there is no downside, no real discipline.
Solution: Expel the kid. Fine the parents for admin and police costs resulting from their kids conduct. THAT will get the parents' attention and involvement.
It seems to be a copycat of a group of dads who volunteer to monitor school grounds in New Orleans. Why do you think moms are excluded? Even if they are, the lack of fatherhood presence is a big reason why we have so much degeneracy in our schools (before you @ me, that was the foundation for the New Orleans program that was developed…..by dads).
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2022 8:10 pm
10 years for Will Smith. I do not approve at all of what he did. IMHO, 10 years is just too much. It looks like rage, not courage.
Guest
Anonymous
April 8, 2022 8:45 pm
Scammed in March 2021; HPD do nothing until April 2022.
The attorney in the story who hooked up Scheeler with the victim appears to be Craig Burr according to the Complaint. Once again a good reminder to never be the link between a good client and an allegedly bad client.
Guest
Anonymous
April 9, 2022 3:14 pm
#freehunter
#freebonniebulla
#freetherodeoanimals
Guest
Anonymous
April 11, 2022 2:47 am
Julie Kelly is a national treasure. The entrapment in Michigan should make every criminal defense attorney shudder. The direct connection to J6 is stunning.
Do not be naïve – these things happen on the local level in various formats as well.
Guest
Anonymous
April 11, 2022 3:35 pm
Nevada Secretary of State site remains completely down.
Guest
Anonymous
April 11, 2022 4:15 pm
New Solo hoping for some help here. I'm trying to understand the Bar's stance on flat fees from last year's article. They seem to want nothing but a true retainer (pay for being on-call) to go into operating account. Does that mean that even things with a quick turnaround, like a will, or a deed, etc. has to hit the trust account first? If it has a delivery time of one week? Two weeks? What about de minimus things like traffic court appearances? Someone gives me $50 to appear for them and take the standard offer, and that doesn't go into operating until… when? I set up the date? I appear? I guess I understand that they don't want to see non-refundable, earned-upon-receipt, $10,000 flat fee for a lengthy representation, but why does SBN have a problem with "earned on receipt" when like 48 other state bars don't?
I once wrote a lengthy appeal that surveyed the Flat Fee law in all 50 states – it took me many months. From memory, EVERY state and EVERY appellate decision was OK with Flat Fees. However, you must remember that the NSB exists as a puppet of the large law firms and they prosper with retainers. Look back at the NSB magazine and see that 99.9% of discipline is against SOLOs. My advice: do not use Flat Fees with this bar. Sadly it is often the only thing that can truly help the economically disadvantaged. Or move to Arizona like I did haha and get support from the Bar. Plus, it's nice down here.
How are the judges in AZ? I hear they are better than Nevada. Is this true? The decline of the bench has me contemplating a move to another jurisdiction.
I think it is actually 2 separate and distinct issues that are somewhat interrelated… Flat fee agreements and non-refundable fees. I doubt they have major heartburn with a flat fee concept (assuming the amount is a reasonable amount). It is unethical to try to charge an unreasonable fee, but having the parties agree at the beginning on an amount that is reasonable yet eliminates the uncertainties inherent in an hourly fee agreement can benefit both sides.
It is the attempt to declare it nonrefundable that causes major heartburn. Whether a fee is hourly, percentage, flat or otherwise it still needs to be reasonable and actually earned. Even in a flat fee scenario, if the work is only partially completed the unearned portion of the fee needs to be refunded.
Guest
Anonymous
April 11, 2022 5:25 pm
My advice is read NRPC 1.5 and apply it to your flat fee because that is what OBC is going to do– is your flat fee reasonable for the services that you actually performed (as opposed to what you will perform). The word "reasonable" (or unreasonable) appears 5 times in the rule.
Justice Jackson may be the most qualified person to ever serve. I have no idea. But what I do not think is helpful is that her nomination is perceived to be because of her skin color. I think we should always pick the most qualified and when we do not it hurts the person who is supposedly the beneficiary. I believe any form of affirmative action hurts the people it is supposed to help. I think it is simply a way to make (usually white people) feel like they are doing something. Just my 2 cents as no one else is posting. I hope she serves with honor.
I have not heard anyone claim that she is "the most qualified person to EVER serve." What I have heard is: "SHE IS HIGHLY QUALIFIED TO SERVE." Two things can be true at the same time: that she is both highly qualified to serve as a Supreme Court Justice and that she is the first black woman to serve as a justice. Both things can be celebrated, as they are. The people who have issues with this … have issues.
OP back. I apologize for not being articulate and leading to your misunderstanding. By Biden saying he would pick a woman of color, it gives argument to those who say she does not deserve the position and got there by skin color. I ask: Why couldn't he just say I'll find the most/best qualified and it happens to Justice Jackson. My point is that the way Biden did it undermines the actual person he is trying to help. Or am I wrong?
Let's not forget that there may have already been a black woman (Judge Janice Rogers Brown) on the Supreme Court had then-Senator Biden not pledged to filibuster her nomination … amazing how some things come full circle
Or how he treated Anita Hill. I am glad that she was confirmed.
I think it's important to keep in mind that there are a lot of lawyers, jurists, and academics who are qualified to serve on SCOTUS for one reason or another. In truth, I don't think anyone has a set of skills that makes them "most qualified" because peoples' backgrounds have different facets that serve them in different ways while on the bench. Justice Sotomayor is, I believe, the only person to have been a district judge; Justice Barrett was an academic for the majority of her career, and I think there's significant value in that, too. In some ways, the decision of who to pick is arbitrary because there are many people who are qualified and will do a fabulous job, including many black women and white men. Accepting all of that, I don't think there's anything wrong with consciously selecting someone from a demographic background that has traditionally been excluded from the Court. Did Biden's stated goal give others an argument to say that Judge Jackson does not deserve the position? Yes, of course. That doesn't mean those arguments are correct.
OP once again. Thank you to all for the civil answers. It proves we can discuss "touchy" subjects and keep it civil. Thanks to blog master for letting us proceed.
I agree with the point at 10:53. Biden should've just picked Jackson and said it was because she was qualified. That would've been accurate and not signaled that she was selected with the aid of AA. By first narrowing the pool of potential applicants, Biden sent the message that Jackson may not be the best, but that she'll do. I think Jackson is a great choice, and I believe (and hope) that her tenure on the court will prove me right.
Is there something more going on with this Robinhood702 story? Seems like pretty small potatoes for two separate criminal prosecutions
While I often find her to be a tad shrill, Dana Gentry in the Current has been following it closely and raising some eyebrows about why Wolfson might had it out for RobinHood. The story has strong elements of insider justice Vegas-style.
Is corruption inside Vegas and it's politicians, judges, attorneys, Casino operators, District Attorney Steven Wolfson, his asst DA's and shady attorney David Chesnoff a big surprise? I think not. It's only a matter of time when the DOJ, FBI and Attorney General's office, will rise up and finally investigate and prosecute these criminals dressed as upstanding citizens and politicians.
Corruption in Vegas has been going on for decades and decades.
WTF is taking so long?
The circle jerk of Las Vegas.
They all protect each other.
Absolutely disgusting!
Real upstanding Citizens of Las Vegas should rise up and say "ENOUGH" and vote these pathetic clowns out of office!
Let's start 2022 and VOTE for Ozzie Fumo!!!
Ozzie can start cleaning up Las Vegas and prosecute the real criminals of Las Vegas….. their own inner circle!
Dana Gentry with the Nevada Current has alot of fortitude to report and expose all these corrupt politicians and judges and Casino operators. Why isn't the national press like WSJ and NYT doing the same?
They don't care like Dana cares!!
She was born and raised in Las Vegas and wants to hold people in office and beyond accountable for ALL their actions especially when those perverted actions are self serving or come with an agenda that helps only their connected friends in positions of power. Bravo Dana
Where do you start with Vegas corruption? Follow the money along with all the campaign contributions to the biggest politicians.
Don't be a hater, everyone's gotta eat!
Look at where the highest amount of donations go, and your have your best corruption.
Looks like the fix is in for Robinhood702. He pissed off the Money Machine players of Las Vegas. Anyone with half a brain could see Judge Baucum is part of the fix against him. Shuts off Bluejeans feed on purpose so no one could see or report on her shady hearing where see protected Robert Alexander a guy who defrauded millions from investors. Thank God the Review Journal was there to report on what craziness went on, including DA adding two more felony charges to an already bogus case for taking a phone and giving it to security.
Attorney General needs to step in and investigate.
These corrupt people need to be help accountable.
Bill Maher explained that he believed Twitter has gotten so ingrained into our lives and daily discourse, that it could no longer ban users as it would amount to suppression of free speech. 'We live in a different age where Twitter is the public square now,' Maher said. 'If you deny someone's right to speak on Twitter, you're basically saying you don't have free speech rights. I think that's what Elon Musk wants to fix at Twitter.'
Shutting off/kicking people out of BlueJeans is an interesting conundrum. This is not a family court hearing that is sealed; this is a public hearing. Furthermore I looked this morning and Gentry put in a Media Request for Electronic Coverage (same thing RJ did) but Gentry was kicked out.
Judge Suzan Baucum and Asst DA Zadrowski were apparently holding their own KANGAROO COURT adding more BS charges and didn't want the press or anyone knowing what they were about to do to silence this innocent until proven given guilty defendant.
This stuff happens every day in Corrupt Vegas justice system.
If David Chesnoff was his attorney he would have never been charged.
Vote Baucum and Wolfson out of office. Take away all their power and juice!
Vote for Rebecca Saxe for Justice Court Judge Dept 13 instead of Suzan Baucum.
I think you call of this….
Prosecutorial Vindictiveness
2:59, who?
This is so absurd I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone!
Judge Judy should decide this.
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” H.L. Mencken
https://www.nevadacurrent.com/2022/04/11/gambler-alleges-constitutional-rights-violated/
As to CCSD, what's the deal with the Board of Trustees comprised of mainly women adopting a program called DADS, that recruits men to keep an eye on the campuses for our kids. The concept is good but seriously an organization that appears to discriminate against Women was adopted by the school board comprised of women.
What's the deal?
I read this comment and heard it in Jerry Seinfeld voice.
"Whaaat's the deal with THAT?!"
Whaaaat's the deal with the patriarchy?
CCSD – is long running continuing joke.
Spoke to a 16 year old recently. I learned that some kids thinks it makes them look tough and cool to jeer and name call police. Extra points for striking another kid and having police come to the school.
The kids know there is no downside, no real discipline.
Solution: Expel the kid. Fine the parents for admin and police costs resulting from their kids conduct. THAT will get the parents' attention and involvement.
It seems to be a copycat of a group of dads who volunteer to monitor school grounds in New Orleans. Why do you think moms are excluded? Even if they are, the lack of fatherhood presence is a big reason why we have so much degeneracy in our schools (before you @ me, that was the foundation for the New Orleans program that was developed…..by dads).
10 years for Will Smith. I do not approve at all of what he did. IMHO, 10 years is just too much. It looks like rage, not courage.
Scammed in March 2021; HPD do nothing until April 2022.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/henderson-police-say-real-estate-scheme-scammed-investor-of-millions-2558346/
The alleged fraudster gave an interview on KLAS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDHjeiys3a0
Allegations in the RJ seem to match the facts alleged in Case A-20-820141-C.
More likely its A-21-836507-C since the Review-Journal stated that the alleged victim was represented by Leo Flangas.
The attorney in the story who hooked up Scheeler with the victim appears to be Craig Burr according to the Complaint. Once again a good reminder to never be the link between a good client and an allegedly bad client.
#freehunter
#freebonniebulla
#freetherodeoanimals
Julie Kelly is a national treasure. The entrapment in Michigan should make every criminal defense attorney shudder. The direct connection to J6 is stunning.
https://amgreatness.com/2022/04/09/fbi-kidnapping-caper-was-flagrant-election-interference/
Do not be naïve – these things happen on the local level in various formats as well.
Nevada Secretary of State site remains completely down.
New Solo hoping for some help here. I'm trying to understand the Bar's stance on flat fees from last year's article. They seem to want nothing but a true retainer (pay for being on-call) to go into operating account. Does that mean that even things with a quick turnaround, like a will, or a deed, etc. has to hit the trust account first? If it has a delivery time of one week? Two weeks? What about de minimus things like traffic court appearances? Someone gives me $50 to appear for them and take the standard offer, and that doesn't go into operating until… when? I set up the date? I appear? I guess I understand that they don't want to see non-refundable, earned-upon-receipt, $10,000 flat fee for a lengthy representation, but why does SBN have a problem with "earned on receipt" when like 48 other state bars don't?
I once wrote a lengthy appeal that surveyed the Flat Fee law in all 50 states – it took me many months. From memory, EVERY state and EVERY appellate decision was OK with Flat Fees. However, you must remember that the NSB exists as a puppet of the large law firms and they prosper with retainers. Look back at the NSB magazine and see that 99.9% of discipline is against SOLOs. My advice: do not use Flat Fees with this bar. Sadly it is often the only thing that can truly help the economically disadvantaged. Or move to Arizona like I did haha and get support from the Bar. Plus, it's nice down here.
How are the judges in AZ? I hear they are better than Nevada. Is this true? The decline of the bench has me contemplating a move to another jurisdiction.
I think it is actually 2 separate and distinct issues that are somewhat interrelated… Flat fee agreements and non-refundable fees. I doubt they have major heartburn with a flat fee concept (assuming the amount is a reasonable amount). It is unethical to try to charge an unreasonable fee, but having the parties agree at the beginning on an amount that is reasonable yet eliminates the uncertainties inherent in an hourly fee agreement can benefit both sides.
It is the attempt to declare it nonrefundable that causes major heartburn. Whether a fee is hourly, percentage, flat or otherwise it still needs to be reasonable and actually earned. Even in a flat fee scenario, if the work is only partially completed the unearned portion of the fee needs to be refunded.
My advice is read NRPC 1.5 and apply it to your flat fee because that is what OBC is going to do– is your flat fee reasonable for the services that you actually performed (as opposed to what you will perform). The word "reasonable" (or unreasonable) appears 5 times in the rule.