The full article is below!
TX Gov. Abbott issues executive order freeing salon owner Shelley Luther from jail
“Texas Gov. Greg Abbott issued an executive order Thursday retroactively eliminating jail time for citizens who violate the state’s stay-at-home rules, freeing salon owner Shelley Luther, who was jailed for seven days and fined $7,000 for reopening her business against court orders.”
“Today, we are governed by dangerous men and women. For they have taken away our ability to make personal choices, and they have used force to compel compliance. In doing that, they have not only violated their oaths to uphold the Bill of Rights, they also have committed the criminal acts of nullifying our rights. By using the powers of state governments to do this, they have made themselves candidates for federal criminal prosecutions when saner days return.”
WHAT? Excessive? WHO THE HELL DOES ABBOTT THINK HE IS? I was AM SO GLAD we are NEVER moving to TEXAS!
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said :
“I find it outrageous and out of touch that during this national pandemic, a judge … would jail a mother for operating her hair salon in an attempt to put food on her family’s table,” Paxton said in a statement, calling state district Judge Eric Moyé’s order to jail and fine Luther, owner of Salon a la Mode, “a shameful abuse of judicial discretion.[1]”
DISCRETION? THERE IS NO DISCRETION TO VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION. NONE. WHAT. SO. EVER!
Some scant Republican state law makers are planning to go to the state Supreme Court to try to get this stopped. They don’t have standing. Newsflash idiots.
BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANYTHING BUT THE LITERAL JUDICIAL SANCTIONED DESTRUCTION OF THE RULE OF LAW!
A PERSON CANNOT DEFY A JUDGE WHO IS DEFYING THE CONSTITUTION. IT IS THE OBLIGATION OF THE CITIZEN TO DEFY THE DEFIANCE!
GOVERNOR GREGG ABBOTT’S ORDER CLOSING BUSINESSES IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. HE SHOULD BE PUNISHED FOR IT! (BARR IS ASLEEP!)
ONLY THE LEGISLATURE CAN ENACT LAWS AND ONLY THE LEGISLATURE CAN DETERMINE IF A CRIME EXISTS OR NOT BY PASSING A LAW THAT DOES NOT VIOLATE THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. ABBOTT, LIKE MANY POWER HUNGRY IDIOT GOVERNORS TOOK IT UPON HIMSELF TO CREATE A LAW OUT OF THIN AIR, WHOLE CLOTH IN A TOTAL DISREGARD AND DESTRUCTIVE ACT AGAINST THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
A JUDGE ISSUING A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER TO ENFORCE THAT ILLEGAL ‘ORDER’ COMMITTED A VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION HE SWORE TO PROTECT.
He even announced IN PUBLIC COURT FROM PRE WRITTEN STATEMENTS that the poor lady had managed to violate THE ORDER TO AN ELECTED OFFICIAL! WHO THE HELL DOES THIS PIECE OF SHIT JUDGE THINK HE IS? Being a lifelong Democrat is NO EXCUSE.
APPLYING A PENALTY FOR AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL ORDER FROM AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL ORDER IS STILL UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
But nobody seems to be bothering with the Constitution in Texas. Not in any other state either. And our illustrious Federal Attorney General IS ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL.
So.
REST IN PEACE RULE OF LAW. IT WAS A NICE RUN.
June 21st, 1788 TILL THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2020.
IT DIED IN TEXAS OF ALL PLACES.
SOMEBODY FORGOT THE ALAMO!
[1] “Judicial discretion is a very broad concept because of the different kinds of decisions made by judges and because of the different limits placed on those decisions. Article III, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution grants the judiciary broad power, which extends “to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made.” Judges’ decisions must be made based on the “rule of law,” which, in the United States, derives not only from statutes passed by Congress but also from the tenets of the Constitution. In addition, Common Law, or judge-made law, provides limits based on the principle of Stare Decisis, which holds that a court’s decision in a particular case must comport with the rules of law as they have been determined by that court or by other, higher-level courts, in previous cases. Legal conclusions that do not fit within the prescribed limits of both statutory and common law may be overturned by a reviewing court if that court determines that the conclusions were an abuse of judicial discretion.“