Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Quote of the Day – Lawsuits
Nobody ever wins a lawsuit but the lawyers. – Robert A. Heinlein
The Democrats are the party of lawyers. Yes, there are plenty of lawyers in the Republican Party, but the Republicans tend not to support things that increase business for lawyers. Increased regulation, policies favoring increased litigation, and complex statutes all create business opportunities for lawyers and are typically favored by Democrats rather than Republicans. The Democrats own lawfare.
Right now the Trump Administration is being inundated with lawsuits. Many, perhaps most, are frivolous. Either that or those bringing the lawsuits simply do not understand the Constitution. That is what one has to conclude after hearing Democrats screaming that the president — you know, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed — should not be meddling with the US Armed Forces; or that the president — in whom executive power is vested — is creating a Constitutional crisis by exercising that power over the agencies of the Executive Branch. (I know, embrace the power of “and.” They are frivolous and those bringing them do not understand the Constitution. For them a word means exactly what they intend it to mean. No more and no less.)
Yes, these lawsuits will all go down to dusty death. In the end, they will be counterproductive because they will strengthen the Trump presidency, restoring much of the executive power that was filched in the aftermath of Watergate. Despite this, the Democrats still win. They are the party of lawyers and Heinlein is right: nobody ever wins a lawsuit but the lawyers. Even if they lose the case, they enrich themselves and their profession.
Unless a means can be found to ensure the lawyers lose along with the losing lawfare lawsuits they bring, lawfare will continue. With the courts, lawyers are the house. At present, the game is rigged in favor of the house.
Published in Group Writing
I would say the individual lawfare lawyer enriches itself monetarily but demeans its profession.
The progs demean everything they touch !
Well, the have all that cash to comfort themselves with. Shame only works when the one being shamed has a sense of shame. Good luck with that.
Totally agree, it’s out of control. Some idiot sued a poor woman in Iowa because she published a political poll he didn’t like. Can you imagine?
Go away or I will revert this thread to draft. I don’t need trolling here and you are Ricochet’s worst troll.
Perhaps this would be best handled as a private message? — mod.
Other countries have “Loser Pays” systems. I think that would help put the system back in balance.
We should keep a White House legal work hours tab for all these frivolous lawsuits and apply a fine to cover those costs to the loser and deposit that to the Treasury General Fund.
Need to pass a law for that first.
That’s sometimes a good idea for basic civil lawsuits involving private individuals at least on one side. But when government agencies are sometimes suing each other, that isn’t as valuable.
Have a second trial to determine if the case was frivolous. Make sure it gets tried in flyover country, with a jury mandatory. None of the jurors can work for any government – local, state, or federal (including public school districts). If the jury decides the case was frivolous, any government employees involved in bringing or prosecuting the case get fired, losing all benefits (including retirement and pension) and can never work for the Federal government again. Any NGO that was a party to a suit ruled frivolous is barred from receiving Federal funding in the future and any individuals in that NGO will cause any non-profit they work for in the future to forfeit all Federal funding.
Thus doubling the actual number of cases? Great idea. Although I suppose that having the second trials could result in a reduction of the number of first trials. But unless it’s by more than half, it’s just a wash.
And you realize that if a government employee is told by their boss to initiate the lawsuit or else be fired, that means they get fired either way? Doesn’t seem like a great idea.
Oh, I got it! The fired employee sues their possibly-also-fired boss for ordering them to file the lawsuit!
Which got them fired for doing it, or got them fired for NOT doing it.
My complaint is not lawsuits. It is frivolous lawsuits. You should not be able to punish someone for filing a frivolous lawsuit except through a process similar to that of the legal system (No freeman shall be held or bound, or dispossessed of legal ground, except by lawful judgement found and passed upon him by his peers. That is the heart of the common law.) And given the punishment for those participating in a frivolous lawsuit (as judged by twelve normals, not by those with skin in the system of creating lawsuits), I expect the number of the frivolous lawsuits filed would drop by more than half.
For that matter, make judges permitting lawsuits deemed frivolous subject to to the same penalties as those filing them. Getting Hawaiian judges off the bench would reduce the number by something on the order of 90%. There are not that many judges willing to let lawfare cases through and they don’t belong on the bench anyway.
If that happened, they could get rehired. If they are stupid, and initiate the lawsuit anyway, they can never return to the Federal government employment and never work for a Federally-funded non-profit again. An appropriate punishment for that level of stupidity.
When I was told to get the clot shot (I was working for a Federal contractor), I refused. For good reason as it turned out. I told them they could fire me, but could not force me to get the shot. They backed down. No one can “force” you to be stupid but yourself. I’d say a lack of spine is a great reason to debar someone from Federal service.
And what would they probably have to do to get rehired? That’s right, sue!
And how long does that take, before they get their job back and have income again?
There are a lot of things that could be improved in the legal system, but that doesn’t seem like a very good way to do one of them.
Isn’t what they are doing known as vexatious litigation? Isn’t there a more straightforward remedy for it?
From listening to various lawyers, “vexatious” seems to be more about people who repeatedly file cases, maybe because they have nothing better to do. Prisoners, for one example. Individual frivolous cases from different people would still be frivolous, but not vexatious.
This is why normal lawyers love lawyer jokes – and grifters hate them . . .