Today in Supreme Court History: August 23, 2007

8/23/2007: John Yates, aboard the Miss Katie boat, threw fish overboard to avoid an inspection. He was prosecuted for destroying property to prevent a federal seizure. In Yates v. United States (2015), the Supreme Court held that the fish was not a "record."

The Roberts Court (2010-2016)

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

Lopez v. United States, 404 U.S. 1213 (decided August 23, 1971): Douglas orders draft resister released on his own recognizance; defendant claimed he had not been allowed to assert conscientious objector status after induction date but was now allowed to under Ehlert v. United States, 402 U.S. 99; Ninth Circuit then remanded for reconsideration on issue of whether his belief as to not being able to assert status was in good faith, 451 F.2d 1311.

Jimenez v. U.S. District Ct., S.D. Fla., 84 S.Ct. 14 (decided August 23, 1963): Goldberg denies stay of extradition sought by ex-dictator of Venezuela who had argued that 18 U.S.C. §3188 required him to be freed if more than two months had passed since he was “committed for rendition”; Goldberg “assumes” Venezuela will honor its promise to guard Jimenez’s personal safety (in fact it did; he was in jail for five years before trial and sentenced to time served, exiled to Spain, later returned to Venezuela but was disqualified from running for that country’s senate)

[Gandydancer]

18 U.S. Code § 3188 - Time of commitment pending extradition
U.S. Code
Whenever any person who is committed for rendition to a foreign government to remain until delivered up in pursuance of a requisition, is not so delivered up and conveyed out of the United States within two calendar months after such commitment, over and above the time actually required to convey the prisoner from the jail to which he was committed, by the readiest way, out of the United States, any judge of the United States, or of any State, upon application made to him by or on behalf of the person so committed, and upon proof made to him that reasonable notice of the intention to make such application has been given to the Secretary of State, may order the person so committed to be discharged out of custody, unless sufficient cause is shown to such judge why such discharge ought not to be ordered.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 824.)

Hard to square "may" and the unspecified nature of "sufficient cause" (defined in case law?) with the claim of "required him to be freed".

[Michael P]

Wow. The famous bit about Yates v. United States (2015) was that the Supreme Court held that the fish was not a "thing", because according to the principle of noscitur a sociis, a "thing" under that list within Sarb-Ox had to be like a record.

Abbreviating that to "not a record" leaves out the reason that the case was notable at all.

[Gandydancer]

Close. "Tangible object", not "thing". See below for my comment (written prior to seeing yours) on this point, which is essentially the same as yours. Yes, Blackman utterly drops the ball on conveying the point of the decision.

[David Nieporent]

Yes, Blackman utterly drops the ball on conveying the point of the decision.

If it weren't for the fact that he has been posting the same things for years, I'd think he'd outsourced these summaries to ChatGPT.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Justice Kagan, dissenting, cited Dr. Seuss, as I recall. Justices Scalia and Thomas also dissented, I believe.

[Magister]

Kagan cited One Fish, Two Fish, Red Fish, Blue Fish, which is some good mockery. Judicial decorum is all very nice, but it would be enjoyable if it were the case (even if only secretly) that dissenters hurled actual fish at the other justices while yelling "Feel that tangible object, you pedantic twit!"

Ginsburg joined by Roberts, Breyer and Sotomayor; with Alito concurring separately. Kagan, Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy dissenting.

Alito writes: "A fish does not spring to mind [as something similar to records or documents], nor does an antelope, a colonial farmhouse, a hydrofoil, or an oil derrick." Hmm, which of these might have been owned by his billionaire buddy?

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

an antelope, a colonial farmhouse, a hydrofoil, or an oil derrick.” Hmm, which of these might have been owned by his billionaire buddy?

Trick question! Answer: All of them.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Speaking of fargin' trick questions, whatever happened to that common patriotic citizen such as himself, Roman Moroni?

Something involving Sweden, I suspect.

[Gandydancer]

"...which of these might have been owned by his billionaire buddy?"

Does this "billionaire buddy" have a name?

You give the impression that the small bump at the top of your spinal column can't keep the allegations against Alito and Thomas separate.

[Magister]

Does Alito have a billionaire buddy? Yes, the one who took him on a luxurious fishing vacation.

Is it a different billionaire than Thomas's buddy? Yes.

Since you apparently cannot search the internet on your own, I'll help you out with the first result from Google for a search of the two words billionaire Alito.
https://www.propublica.org/article/samuel-alito-luxury-fishing-trip-paul-singer-scotus-supreme-court

[Dan Schiavetta]

today’s film review: Witness, 1985

This started a trend of policeman-as-fish-out-of-water movies, here Harrison Ford hiding from the bad guys in Amish country. It turns out the child of the widow (Kelly McGillis) was a witness to murder by the corrupt cop McPhee (Danny Glover). Of course Ford falls in love with McGillis but, in a realistic turn, they conclude they can’t be together, though this being Hollywood the cops get done in when they try to get him (is suffocating someone by letting a ton of grain fall on him “violence”?).

I saw this with a friend and we were both struck by the respect that the film showed toward the Amish lifestyle, particularly its dedication to nonviolence. She and I were coming from different lives and though we were “friends with benefits” we never could get on the same wavelength. She was a “red diaper baby” who had gone to innovative schools (the kind I read about as a kid and wanted to go to — desperately) and knew how to be left-wing. I was still bumbling at it. I had been around Southern rednecks and began to think of her as something like them, only in a different time and place. Neither ever stepped out of their respective comfort zones. But — with this film she and I had the same reactions.

The Amish here are depicted as thoughtful and smart, and innovative despite their avoidance of modern technology (note the father's pancake-flipping pulley). Hollywood is usually careful to show respect for different religious traditions. With the Anabaptist “peace churches” we also saw this in Except for Thee and Me and its progenitor, Friendly Persuasion. One could argue that such churches can survive only with the protection of regimes that do believe in violence, at least when it’s necessary to keep order and repel invasion. I don’t think it’s an either-or situation. One can mix both into a consistent mentality. Unfortunately United States politics has long been in a you’re-only-a-real-man-if-you-believe-in-violence mode. Tom Scocca once wrote cogently about the “strange cartoon world of Washington politics and punditry, in which you are considered a hard-nosed realist if you believe that armed force solves problems, and a useless idealist if you believe armed force might create new problems.”

Back to the Anabaptists . . . When I was running the crisis center in the 1980’s we worked with a local community which helped with the food bank and with putting homeless people up in shelters and motels. They were good folks, though one couldn’t exactly joke around with them. They came to town occasionally, easily recognized by their clothing. I can’t say a bad word about them. Within the agency (run mostly by Jewish lesbians) there was debate about their childrearing. Their society held to traditional sex roles. But as someone put it, “they turn out great kids”. There was the occasional freakout (which I dealt with) but that’s true of anyplace. There was general coexistence, which was the important thing.

[Commenter_XY]

One of my faves; great film. Whatever became of Samuel?

[Dan Schiavetta]

Given his exposure to the outside world, one wonders whether he stayed with his community. Probably he did, but it would be interesting to see to what extent members leave, and of those who don’t, what ideas they have about the outside world.

As to the other side of the story . . . Recently on business I was in the North Country of New York State (Gouverneur, to be exact, pronounced there "Gover-norr") where there were Amish (I had to pass their buggies, wondering how harsh it must be to travel that way on that sleety winter night). When traveling I always try to eat at the bar and listen to the local characters. I was surprised to find that up there the locals don’t like the Amish, who (they say) never bother to pay taxes, cheat people, and are allowed to get away with it. Of course I was in Elise Stefanik country and even at that it was probably not a representative crowd.

[David Nieporent]

who (they say) never bother to pay taxes, cheat people, and are allowed to get away with it.

One can say that about the Amish because they don't have (((space lasers.)))

[Dan Schiavetta]

You found a way to make the comparison! I struggled with how to work it in there and couldn't find the words.

[Gandydancer]

The triple bracket sound isn't (((space lasers))).

(That business of moving punctuation inside of brackets is looney.)

[Kleppe]

"I had been around Southern rednecks and began to think of her as something like them [...]"

"Of course I was in Elise Stefanik country and even at that it was probably not a representative crowd"

Never get between a liberal and their coveted stereotypes. They cannot function without them.

[Magister]

It's a great movie.

My questions about Amish childrearing would include, beyond traditional gender roles, not equipping their children to function in the outside world, in part through restricted education (Wisconsin v. Yoder). To the Amish credit, Amish children must choose to join the community when they are old enough, and apparently over 90% do. But it's not clear whether that's because being Amish is an attractive choice, or in order to remain with family who would shun an outsider, or because it's all that most can handle; it's not like huge numbers of outsiders join Amish communities.

Eugene mentioned Wisconsin v. Yoder in a post last year about pseudonymity because of religious membership. The Amish got an exemption on education requirements compared to other religions because there was "evidence … show[ing] that the Amish have an excellent record as law-abiding and generally self-sufficient members of society," and that "the Amish community has been a highly successful social unit within our society." Eugene states he thinks that this feature of the decision was rightly criticized.

https://reason.com/volokh/2022/08/26/protecting-people-from-their-own-religious-communities-judicial-evaluation-of-a-religious-communitys-qualities/

[Dan Schiavetta]

The Amish are not a cult, that's for sure.

[Gandydancer]

Really?

[SRG2]

The moment when the kid is about to point to one of the cops in a photo in the police station is one of the great moments in film, IMO.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Yes. It takes the audience by surprise as well as the Harrison character. Even as a child Lukas Haas was some actor.

[David Nieporent]

murder by the corrupt cop McPhee (Danny Glover).

Spoiler alert!

[Magister]

Isn't that the reason that they have to hide in Amish country? I don't recall the specific identity of the bad cop being a big reveal. You might as well say "hiding from the bad guys in Amish country" is a spoiler. Not that there aren't significant spoilers in the review regarding the ending.

OK, I do have a complaint.

suffocating someone by letting a ton of grain fall on him

Ewww. Spoilage alert! I don't want to eat anything made with grain that had a dead body under it.

[Dan Schiavetta]

It is a grisly scene.

As for the plot details, like almost all the films I review, I haven't seen it since it came out, so I might have gotten a few things wrong.

I see that I misspelled the Glover character's name. It should be McFee (in the Mad Magazine sendup it was "McWeewee").

[David Nieporent]

Isn’t that the reason that they have to hide in Amish country? I don’t recall the specific identity of the bad cop being a big reveal. You might as well say “hiding from the bad guys in Amish country” is a spoiler. Not that there aren’t significant spoilers in the review regarding the ending.

Yeah, I was kidding. It's a 40 year old movie. One doesn't get the benefit of spoiler alerts for decades-old things. Rosebud was a sled, the Titanic sank, and Darth was Luke's father.

[Magister]

You complained when I spilled the beans on the ending of the Abraham Lincoln story, so I figured you don't get out much.

But Darth Vader can't be Luke Skywalker's father because they don't have the same last name. Also, you haven't explained "Henri" and "with mustard".

[ElrondPA]

Luke & Leia don't have the same last name, either.

[Gandydancer]

"I don’t think it’s an either-or situation. One can mix both into a consistent mentality."

These words are pretending to say something, but not convincingly.

If no one, including you, is capable of violence on your behalf then you're just road kill.

[David Nieporent]

I saw this with a friend and we were both struck by the respect that the film showed toward the Amish lifestyle,

Except now every time I see an Amish person I want to reach for an ice cream cone.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Every time I see a group of Amish people I feel sorrow for the children.

[Frank Drackman]

you feel something for children all right.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

For those of us who grew up in and around the area where the film takes place, the most noteworthy scene is where the police officer from Lancaster County mispronounces the name of the county. It isn't pronounced like the actor, the first syllable is emphasized. The second syllable is just a schwa.

[Dan Schiavetta]

I thought it was Burt Lank-ss-ter. Now I'm confused.

[Gandydancer]

"8/23/2007: John Yates, aboard the Miss Katie boat, threw fish overboard to avoid an inspection. He was prosecuted for destroying property to prevent a federal seizure...."

Shoddy work, Blackman:. No, THAT was NOT what he was prosecuted for. He was charged with violating 18 U. S. C. 519, which applies when a person “knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence” a federal investigation. SCOTUS held that tossing the fish overboard didn't count as "destroy[ing a] tangible object" because, in context, only a "tangible object" akin to "a false entry in any record [or a] document" could qualify.

[Krayt]

[BravoCharlieDelta]

Speaking of Ford, I just learned yesterday of Fordlandia. A town started in Brazil by the other famous Ford, Henry. He created it to have a company town providing a secure source of rubber back in 1928.

It still exists today.

[Frank Drackman]

He should have got one for his Falfa character in "Amurican Graffiti", "I ain't nobody Dork"* ( and a great rendition of "One Enchanted Evening")
and he's 1/2 Jewish, Not to shabby!

Frank
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HbMByb-PIg

[Dan Schiavetta]

One of many dictators we supported because he was opposed to Communism. Much of what you wrote was done with our tax dollars. After he was thrown out he was allowed to flee to the Dominican Republic (run by another dictator we supported, Trujillo) and then to the U.S. According to wikipedia the Venezuelan economy expanded during his rule, but with all that oil it could hardly otherwise and who benefited?

[Dilan Esper]

Your last assumption is incorrect. Chavez and Maduro have ruined the Venezuelan economy despite the oil.

The best piece analyzing the economics of this was a Tina Rosenberg piece from several years ago.

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04oil-t.html

[Gandydancer]

“Much of what you wrote was done with our tax dollars.”

The NYT quote says with utter clarity, “...the earnings from oil sales were diverted...”. Did you pull your contrary claim out of your ass because it sounded good or can you point to something else?

[Gandydancer]

"he’s 1/2 Jewish"

So is Scarlett Johansson. Who knew?

(Note to haters: So am I.)

[Dan Schiavetta]

Dilan

Thanks for the article. It shows that stupidity is an even more abundant natural resource than oil.

[Gandydancer]

“The best piece analyzing the economics of this was a Tina Rosenberg piece from several years ago.”

That is from 2007 (not just several years ago) and, as one expects from the NYT, it is utter claptrap. E.g.,

Oil not only creates very few jobs, it also destroys jobs in other sectors. By pushing up a country’s exchange rate, the export of oil distorts the economy. “Oil rents drive out any other productive activity,” Karl says. “Why would you bother to produce your own food if you could buy it? Why would you bother to develop any kind of export industry if oil makes your money worth more and that hurts all your other exports?” The most successful societies develop a middle class through manufacturing; oil makes this extremely difficult.

Nor who is this person in Rosenberg’s imagination that doesn’t need to produce food because he can just buy it? She’s just told us that the oil industry creates very few jobs.

I wouldn’t, btw, give the enemy any money, but Shell Oil reprinted it out from behind the paywall:https://royaldutchshellgroup.com/2007/11/04/the-new-york-times-the-perils-of-petrocracy/

edit: Actually, I’m not sure who that site actually is. It maybe seems designed to troll Shell.

[Mr. Bumble]

Given the various diaspora of Jews is that in any way surprising?

[Frank Drackman]

Love to give her some of my 1/2 Hebrew National

[Krayt]

You only assume because they barf socialism and Chomsky approves, that it still isn't about being the kleptocrat-in-chief.

Fundamental Theorem of Government: Corruption isn't an unfortunate side effect of the wielding of power. It is the purpose of it from day one. It is why people go into power.

[BravoCharlieDelta]

1/2 a Hebrew National is like 2 1/2 inches.

lol

[Gandydancer]

Surprised me. Her mother's terminus for diaspora doesn't seem particularly "various" (it was to New York City), but I'd assumed she was Danish on more than one side. In particular I don't recall it being mentioned during the SodaStream kerfuffle, though it must have been.

[Gandydancer]

You are misinformed.
https://www.instacart.com/products/16616830-hebrew-national-kosher-beef-salami-1-lb