THIEL COLLEGE--Comment No. 4

Why is the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roper v. Simmons so important to juvenile criminal justice jurisprudence?  Explain in detail the decision's impact beyond the death penalty.

Meet one of the leading candidates to become the next Attorney General

Here is an introduction by The Bulwark to Senator Mike Lee of Utah, a short-lister for the position of United State Attorney General:

Public confidence in elections is a foundational requirement for a constitutional republic. Now, more than ever, we must have confidence and trust in Utah’s elections. . . .

The election systems we built here in Utah work well because of a core tenant [sic] of the U.S. Constitution: federalism. When appropriately applied, the division of power between the federal and state governments means decisions that directly impact us are made by people closest to us in state and local government.

United States Senator Mike Lee coauthored the above for Deseret News on October 5, 2022.

Stephen Richer writes, I agree wholeheartedly with the senator’s argument: Utah has reasonable election laws and competent election officials, and the public can trust its election results. Mass interference in Utah’s vote is indeed “virtually impossible,” as Lee put it a bit lower in the piece. And if you don’t like the results of a particular election, you can always work harder to win the next one.

But Lee is now making somewhat different arguments than he did in 2022. He regularly posts that non-citizens will steal our elections if we don’t require voters to provide documented proof of citizenship—something Utah didn’t require for Lee’s 2010, 2016, or 2022 elections.1 He also now says that secure elections require photo identification—but the vast majority of Utah ballots are verified by signature matching, not photo ID. He tells us to be suspicious of mail ballots. But Utah is an all-mail state. And he is suspicious of states that don’t finish counting ballots within forty-eight hours of Election Day—a deadline that Utah failed to hit in 2024.

There’s nothing novel about a flip-flopping politician. Lee is already famous for making a habit of turnabout, including on Trump’s morals (“If anyone spoke to my wife, or my daughter, or my mother, or any of my five sisters the way Mr. Trump has spoken to women, I wouldn’t hire that person”), Trump’s lies (“We can get into the fact that he accused my best friend’s father of conspiring to kill JFK”), and Trump’s disregard for basic law (“I’d like some assurances that he is going to be a vigorous defender for the U.S. Constitution”).

To read more CLICK HERE

Do military lawyers working as federal prosecutors violate Posse Comitatus Act?

 Following the mass exodus of federal prosecutors in Minnesota, the Justice Department has enlisted lawyers from the armed services to fill the gaps, according to Courthouse News Service.

Now, a federal judge is set to decide the legality of using military judge advocate general lawyers to prosecute civilians.

Paul E. Johnson, a Minnesota resident facing a count of assaulting a federal agent in January, claims Special Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Hakes-Rodriguez is unlawfully prosecuting him in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

The act bars federal military troops from participating in civilian law enforcement except when expressly authorized by law — most commonly used to prosecute offenses committed by civilians on military intallations.

The Justice Department contends judge advocates may be detailed to “represent the United States in civil and criminal cases” — asserting Hakes-Rodriguez and others have fully satisfied the necessary requirement to practice in Minnesota federal courts.

“The only connection to the military is their membership, which is not part of their enforcement of civilian law," the government said in a reply brief.

Hakes-Rodriguez told Magistrate Judge Shannon Elkins on Friday his appointment falls under an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act allowing judge advocates assigned to civilian offices to perform duties as requested.

But former judge advocates say military regulations never allowed for the general assignment of military lawyers in civilian matters.

“It is so wrong, and it’s inappropriate, and it’s going to undermine the relationship between civil and military authority for a long time going forward,” said attorney John Marti, a former judge advocate and federal prosecutor in Minnesota.

“If it’s OK for the attorney general to designate military attorneys as special assistants to prosecute civilians in civilian courts for civilian offenses with no nexus to military authority, there is no limitation on the attorney general doing that with all U.S. attorney’s offices,” he added.

A group of 11 former U.S. military attorneys, including Marti, submitted an amicus brief in Johnson’s case, urging the government to revert back to the tradition of limiting military attorney participation in civilian matters.

The group said the government typically details military attorneys on occasion to prosecute offenses committed by civilians on military installations, and in other cases where the military has a “clear and defined interest.”

“The government recently expanded this practice far beyond its historical and statutory bounds,” the group said in the March 10 brief — citing the dozens of military attorneys assigned to U.S. attorney’s offices in Minnesota, Washington, D.C. and Tennessee.

“During these temporary duty assignments, JAGs are not prosecuting cases with a nexus to the U.S. Military,” the former military attorneys said in the brief. “Instead, they are prosecuting civilians for the kind of general, domestic federal offense that civilian DOJ prosecutors would normally handle.”

The group said the government’s use of military attorneys is harming civil-military relations by suggesting military-led law enforcement is the “catch-all” substitute for regular civilian constitutional due process.

Military attorneys also have no choice, according to the group, unlike typical federal prosecutors.

“When civilian prosecutors are instructed by their superiors to pursue legally flawed or ethically suspect cases, they can resign, as they have done in this district,” the group said. “But JAGs do not have this option — they must obey their military superior’s lawful orders upon possible penalty of criminal prosecution.”

Reports say as many as 25 military attorneys could work at the depleted Minnesota U.S. Attorney’s Office in an attempt to keep it afloat after mass resignations during Operation Metro Surge due to ethical conflicts.

Before the start of President Donald Trump’s second term, the office had reportedly more than 40 prosecutors on staff.

With that number now cut in half — not including enlisted military attorneys — it’s unclear how a judicial ruling against the use of military attorneys would impact the office, but Marti said the option to pull lawyers from other government departments — like DHS and ICE — has always existed.

“The question you ask yourself is why do you need military attorneys when all these other agencies have attorneys as well — why not detail them?” Marti said. “I think in part because it’s easier to direct military attorneys to go do a mission.”

Since Operation Metro Surge began, federal prosecutors have faced a reputational downfall through a myriad of court orders threatening contempt over misrepresentations of fact and law, and flouting of judicial instruction. Now, military attorneys sent in to ease the burden face similar challenges.

Hakes-Rodriquez was removed as the prosecutor on Johnson’s case Monday — only to be replaced with fellow military attorney William Richards.

The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday.

To read more CLICK HERE

CREATORS: Punishment Without Limits

Matthew T. Mangino
CREATORS
April 8, 2026

A new Tennessee law will make it easier for people with felony convictions to vote. For years, Tennessee prohibited former offenders who were behind on child support or court costs and fines from voting. The state legislature recently approved a measure that would permit people who have complied with child support for one year to rejoin the voting and rolls. In addition, the law no longer ties payment of court costs and fines to the right to vote.

According to the Prison Project, laws in 48 states ban people with felony convictions from voting. In 2022, an estimated 4.4 million Americans, representing 2% of the voting-age population, were ineligible to vote due to similar disenfranchisement laws or policies.

These never-ending penalties are known as collateral consequences of crime. Disenfranchising former offenders is one of a myriad of lifetime penalties piled on people convicted of felonies in this country.

Lawmakers nationwide would do well to eliminate some of the collateral consequences of a criminal conviction. A criminal record shouldn't be a life sentence. The ever-growing list of collateral sanctions often put former offenders in a position to fail.

A collateral sanction is a penalty, disability or disadvantage that is related to employment or occupational licensing as a result of an offender's conviction. The sanctions apply by operation of law, whether or not the penalty, disability or disadvantage is included in the sentence.

According to The Council of State Governments' Justice Center, a little less than one in three offenders released from prison are reincarcerated within three years, either committing a new crime or violating conditions of parole. While that is an improvement over numbers from a decade ago, it is still too many.

The problems with our crowded prisons are not just the result of punishing offenders for their criminal conduct — the problems are compounded by ongoing sanctions that hinder former offenders from successfully reintegrating into society.

According to a 2024 National Employment Law Project report, an estimated 80 million Americans have a criminal record. The American Bar Association (ABA) has identified over 38,000 penalties — collateral consequences — that can impact people long after they have completed their criminal sentence.

The ABA Task Force on Collateral Consequences found that a former offender "may be ineligible for many federally funded health and welfare benefits, food stamps, public housing and federal educational assistance." As a result, their ability to earn a living in their chosen profession may be limited in that an offender "may no longer qualify for certain employment and professional licenses."

Collateral consequences may prohibit military service, possession of a firearm or federal security clearance. A non-citizen may lose the right to reside in the United States.

Supporting a family is that much more difficult when employers refuse to hire former offenders. Employers may be interested in giving a person a second chance, but they are concerned that hiring a person with a criminal record might expose them to liability for negligent hiring if the person commits a crime on the job.

According to the Vera Institute of Justice, half of all states punish people who cannot pay fines and fees associated with criminal proceedings by taking away their driver's licenses. This practice impacts nearly 11 million people nationwide and diminishes their ability to secure a job, maintain stable housing and participate in their community.

More states, as well as the federal government, need to take action to remove heavy-handed sanctions that drive up costs, increase victimization and often doom offenders to a never-ending cycle of poverty or worse — reincarceration.

Matthew T. Mangino is of counsel with Luxenberg, Garbett, Kelly & George P.C. His book, "The Executioner's Toll," 2010, was released by McFarland Publishing. You can reach him at www.mattmangino.com and follow him on Twitter @MatthewTMangino

To visit Creators CLICK HERE

Trump: The Art of Negotiation

 “Every power plant in Iran will be out of business, burning, exploding and never to be used again.” War crimes are always a good negotiation ploy.

Tennessee law eases former offenders' right to vote

A new Tennessee law has eased up on two longstanding financial hurdles for people with felony sentences who want their voting rights back, including a unique requirement among states that they must have fully paid their child support costs, reported The Associated Press.

The Republican-supermajority Legislature approved the Democratic-sponsored change, which now lets people prove they have complied for the last year with child support orders, such as payment plans. The legislation also unties the payment of all court costs from voting rights restoration.

Advocates for years have sought various changes to Tennessee’s voting rights restoration system at the statehouse and in court. They say loosening these two rules marks the biggest rollback of restrictions to voting rights restoration in decades.

“This is huge and this is history,” said Keeda Haynes, senior attorney for the advocacy group Free Hearts led by formerly incarcerated women like her.

To read more CLICK HERE

FOX News: Man who put up $100K to find Nancy Guthrie says tipsters should skip the sheriff and call Crime Stoppers

As multiple agencies collect tips in the Nancy Guthrie case, the man funding a $100,000 reward says Crime Stoppers — not the sheriff — offers the safest path for witnesses to come forward and an enticing one for people who want to get paid for credible information without giving their name, reported Fox News.

"I believe that people will come forward if they’re anonymous and if they get a reward," said Wisconsin attorney Michael Hupy, who is the president of Crime Stoppers Milwaukee.

In Pima County, Arizona, the local Crime Stoppers affiliate is known as 88-CRIME, and the number is 520-882-7463.

Hupy has paid out $75,000 in rewards and posted another $200,000 in an effort to solve crimes in his hometown. But he told Fox News Digital this week he put up six figures in the Guthrie case due to the alarming circumstances of her disappearance.

To read more CLICK HERE