December 12, 2006

Activist Court's Ruling Criticized by Hawkish Legislators

by PG

Not US, Israel. Is allowing Palestinians to sue for damages caused during Israeli military incursions the equivalent of Section 1983 claims, or do we have common law that covers the obligation of government bodies to pay for damage caused by their operations? It's not quite the same as a Fifth Amendment taking.

The linked article makes for weird reading because it tries to do a catchall "today in the Middle East conflict" report, including news about three little boys' getting killed along with the note about the Israeli high court, so it concludes: "Witnesses said the incident in Khan Younis was the result of a misunderstanding during a protest march over the shooting. As Fatah demonstrators passed a Hamas charity organization, they fired assault rifles into the air. Hamas gunmen fired briefly in response."

Maybe not using firearms as a means of expressing one's most deeply felt emotions would help decrease the number of kids who get shot. I'd give the same advice to the Grangerfords and Shepherdsons: Do not mix the First and Second Amendments.

December 12, 2006 11:34 PM | TrackBack
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Sitting in Review
Armen (e-mail) #
PG (e-mail) #
Dave (e-mail) #
Craig (e-mail) #
About Us
Senior Status
Chris Geidner #
Jeremy Blachman #
Nick Morgan #
Wings & Vodka #
Recent Opinions
Persuasive Authority
De Novo Reporter

Powered by
Movable Type 5.02