web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > article (Page 16)

CBS, Viacom shares drop amid merger plans

Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-9f936890f00a4610943226d0eb94e46f CBS, Viacom shares drop amid merger plans Variety Staff Variety fox-news/entertainment/tv fox-news/entertainment fnc/media fnc article a3003a5c-4bbe-5056-a5dd-19145618f488

Shares of media-industry stocks fell in tandem with an overwhelmingly negative market, which offset enthusiasm for the merger of Viacom and CBS and other parts of the sector.

Shares of Viacom were off $2.49, or 8.52%, in Wednesday trading, down to $26.72 from $29.21. Shares of CBS, meanwhile, were off $4.05, or 8.32%, down to $44.65 from $47.54.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average plummeted Wednesday after investors were spooked by the bond market as well as weak economic data from Germany and China.

CBS, VIACOM AGREE TO MERGE, FORMING A $28B ENTERTAINMENT FIRM

During an investor call Tuesday, executives from both CBS and Viacom made their pitch for the power of the combined entity, which would operate the CBS television network, the Showtime pay-cable service, the Paramount movie studio and the Nickelodeon kids-media unit. They suggested the company could capture more revenue from a new emphasis on streaming video, advanced advertising and affiliate revenue.

Wall Street analysts see the rationale for the deal, but have cautioned against too much optimism about it. “Judging by the tepid and languid reaction, the new company will have to work extra hard to prove the financial merits of this combination,” said Michael Nathanson, a media analyst with MoffettNathanson. Others see a need for the combined company to keep buying more assets to stay competitive. “The firm may need to continue to bulk up via M&A to compete with its much larger peers like Disney, WarnerMedia, and NBCUniversal,” said Neil Mackler, a senior equity analyst at Morningstar.

Investor Mario Gabelli said his funds hold about 5 million preferred voting shares in Viacom, the shares that give the Redstone family, which governs both companies through its National Amusements Inc. movie-exhibition firm,  iron-clad control of both CBS and Viacom. He was not happy to see the preferred Viacom shares valued at the same rate as the non-voting shares.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“From the big picture view, I’m glad they got it done. I need a little extra juice for the voting stock,” Gabelli told Variety on Wednesday. He said he planned to reach out to the company and explore his legal options according to Delaware law, where Viacom is incorporated.  But he said he would also be realistic about weighing the cost of litigation versus the return. “Even if they gave me $3 more a share, that’s about a quarter of the severance of the CEOs that have left. This is not anything that anybody is going to worry about,” he said.

Shares of other big media components also fell Wednesday. Shares of Fox Corp. were off 3.91%, or $1.37 a share. Shares of Walt Disney Company fell 3.04%, or $4.16 a share. Shares of Comcast, owned of NBCUniversal, tumbled 2.51%, or $1.09. And shares of AT&T, owner of WarnerMedia, fell 2.21%, or 77 cents a share.

Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-9f936890f00a4610943226d0eb94e46f CBS, Viacom shares drop amid merger plans Variety Staff Variety fox-news/entertainment/tv fox-news/entertainment fnc/media fnc article a3003a5c-4bbe-5056-a5dd-19145618f488   Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-9f936890f00a4610943226d0eb94e46f CBS, Viacom shares drop amid merger plans Variety Staff Variety fox-news/entertainment/tv fox-news/entertainment fnc/media fnc article a3003a5c-4bbe-5056-a5dd-19145618f488

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

CNN staff ‘embarrassed’ by Chris Cuomo’s Fredo flap

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072639367001_6072638391001-vs CNN staff ‘embarrassed’ by Chris Cuomo’s Fredo flap Oli Coleman New York Post fnc/media fnc article 3873b883-e85e-574b-a76d-3109596e1482

Insiders say that — while CNN brass stood by Chris Cuomo after he was caught on camera threatening a man who called him “Fredo” — the newsroom rank and file was “embarrassed” by the blowup.

Cuomo, who hosts the 9 p.m. “Cuomo Prime Time,” told the guy in the Shelter Island confrontation that the “Godfather” reference was a racial slur “like the ‘N-word’” for Italian Americans, called him “a punk-a– b—-” and told him, “I’ll f–-ing ruin your s – t. I’ll f–-ing throw you down these stairs.”

CNN HAS BAD WEEK AMID APRIL RYAN, CHRIS CUOMO AND DON LEMON NEWS: ‘IT WAS QUITE EMBARRASSING’

One insider said they personally thought the run-in was “great” and that Cuomo would get a pass from higher-ups because “he’s BFFs with [CNN president Jeff] Zucker.” Another said the newsroom chatter was that “everyone thinks it’s fine to stand up to trolls, but it escalated way past where it needed to.” While they said Cuomo generally has a good reputation with the staff, “It was embarrassing.” They added, “It was an unforced error, and he gave the right — and the president — ammunition to use against him and CNN.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

President Donald Trump had a field day with the clip on Twitter, writing, among other things, “I thought Chris was Fredo also. The truth hurts. Totally lost it! Low ratings [CNN],” and calling him “nuts.” After the video surfaced, CNN said, “Chris Cuomo defended himself when he was verbally attacked with the use of an ethnic slur in an orchestrated setup. We completely support him.”

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072639367001_6072638391001-vs CNN staff ‘embarrassed’ by Chris Cuomo’s Fredo flap Oli Coleman New York Post fnc/media fnc article 3873b883-e85e-574b-a76d-3109596e1482   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072639367001_6072638391001-vs CNN staff ‘embarrassed’ by Chris Cuomo’s Fredo flap Oli Coleman New York Post fnc/media fnc article 3873b883-e85e-574b-a76d-3109596e1482

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump suggests ‘personal meeting’ with China’s Xi on Hong Kong protests

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6053892150001_6053887462001-vs Trump suggests 'personal meeting' with China's Xi on Hong Kong protests fox-news/world/world-regions/hong-kong fox-news/world/world-regions/china fox-news/politics fox news fnc/politics fnc Brie Stimson article 22432c24-1012-5c55-97d5-98b20be0a431 /FOX NEWS/WORLD/GLOBAL ECONOMY/Trade

President Trump in a tweet Wednesday evening suggested a “personal meeting” with Chinese President Xi Jinping amid tensions in Hong Kong and fears that an escalating trade war could trigger a global recession.

“I have ZERO doubt that if President Xi wants to quickly and humanely solve the Hong Kong problem, he can do it,” Trump tweeted. Personal meeting?”

The president’s tweet came after weeks of sometimes violent clashes between pro-democracy protesters and police in Hong Kong that started over a now-defunct extradition bill that would allow defendants to be tried in mainland China. The unrest included massive protests at Hong Kong’s airport that resulted in more than 100 flight cancellations.

One possibility for a face-to-face meeting between Trump and Xi could be in advance of the annual United Nations General Assembly in New York City, which is scheduled to begin Sept. 17.

STUART VARNEY ON HONG KONG PROTESTS: HISTORY IS UNFOLDING BEFORE OUR EYES

In a separate tweet, Trump also mentioned his decision to delay new tariffs on $156 billion in Chinese goods from September until December.

“The American consumer is fine with or without the September date, but much good will come from the short deferral to December,” he wrote. “It actually helps China more than us, but will be reciprocated.”

The administration decided this week to delay the new tariffs over concerns about the adverse effect it could have on the holiday shopping season.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The tweets also come as the Dow fell 800 points Wednesday amid worsening fears of a recession.

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6053892150001_6053887462001-vs Trump suggests 'personal meeting' with China's Xi on Hong Kong protests fox-news/world/world-regions/hong-kong fox-news/world/world-regions/china fox-news/politics fox news fnc/politics fnc Brie Stimson article 22432c24-1012-5c55-97d5-98b20be0a431 /FOX NEWS/WORLD/GLOBAL ECONOMY/Trade   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6053892150001_6053887462001-vs Trump suggests 'personal meeting' with China's Xi on Hong Kong protests fox-news/world/world-regions/hong-kong fox-news/world/world-regions/china fox-news/politics fox news fnc/politics fnc Brie Stimson article 22432c24-1012-5c55-97d5-98b20be0a431 /FOX NEWS/WORLD/GLOBAL ECONOMY/Trade

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Jeffrey Epstein autopsy reveals broken bones in neck, cause of death pending: report

An autopsy on the body of Jeffrey Epstein revealed the convicted sex offender had several broken bones in his neck, including the hyoid bone, according to a report.

The hyoid bone, which is near the Adam’s apple, can be broken in a suicide by hanging — especially in older people — but is more common in strangulation murders, The Washington Post reported.

EPSTEIN ACCUSER’S LAWYER: GHISLAINE MAXWELL WAS A ‘PRINCIPAL CONSPIRATOR’ IN ALLEGED SEX-TRAFFICKING RING

Epstein, 66, was found hanging in his cell in an “apparent suicide” at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City on Saturday where he was being held on sex trafficking charges.

He was placed on suicide watch in July but was removed from it by the end of the month.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The circumstances surrounding Epstein’s death have led to several unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

His official cause of death is still pending, The Post reported.

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6073044558001_6073040978001-vs Jeffrey Epstein autopsy reveals broken bones in neck, cause of death pending: report fox-news/us/crime/sex-crimes fox-news/travel/vacation-destinations/new-york-city fox-news/person/jeffrey-epstein fox news fnc/us fnc Brie Stimson article 07c65c66-fd5b-5534-872e-5c98fec58edc   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6073044558001_6073040978001-vs Jeffrey Epstein autopsy reveals broken bones in neck, cause of death pending: report fox-news/us/crime/sex-crimes fox-news/travel/vacation-destinations/new-york-city fox-news/person/jeffrey-epstein fox news fnc/us fnc Brie Stimson article 07c65c66-fd5b-5534-872e-5c98fec58edc

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

This Day in History: Aug. 15

On this day, Aug, 15 …

1969: The Woodstock Music and Art Fair opens in Bethel, N.Y.

Also on this day:

  • 1939: “The Wizard of Oz” premieres in Hollywood.
  • 1947: The Indian Independence Bill creates the two independent states of India and Pakistan.
  • 1998: A car bomb kills 29 people in Omagh, Northern Ireland, the deadliest act of violence in more than 30 years of the “Troubles.”
Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-c282a4035a23426b966a116fee63256b This Day in History: Aug. 15 fox-news/us/this-day-in-history fox news fnc/us fnc article 80f87d53-ecb9-518a-8447-cd3c1cae7dff   Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-c282a4035a23426b966a116fee63256b This Day in History: Aug. 15 fox-news/us/this-day-in-history fox news fnc/us fnc article 80f87d53-ecb9-518a-8447-cd3c1cae7dff

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Would Colbert invite Trump on his show again? ‘The quick answer would be no’

Westlake Legal Group Stephen-COlbert Would Colbert invite Trump on his show again? 'The quick answer would be no' Joseph Wulfsohn fox-news/politics fox-news/person/stephen-colbert fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/entertainment/politics-on-late-night fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 3129c105-a6b7-5132-a3aa-05aed74de08c

“Late Show” host Stephen Colbert said during an interview on CNN on Wednesday night that he would not invite President Trump back onto his show, saying it would be hard for him to be “properly respectful of the office.”

“Would you want to have Trump on your show again?” CNN anchor Anderson Cooper asked.

“The quick answer would be no,” Colbert said after a brief pause, “because it would be hard for me to be properly respectful of the office. Because I think that he is so disrespectful of the office that it’s very hard to perceive him as I would want to perceive a president in terms of their status and the dignity and the representation of the United States. So I think just for safety’s sake, it wouldn’t be a good idea.”

Colbert previously had then-candidate Trump on his show in September 2015 during the GOP primary period.

JIMMY KIMMEL SAYS AMERICANS WHO SUPPORT TRUMP HAVE BEEN ‘REPEATEDLY PUNCHED IN THE HEAD’

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

During the interview, the “Late Show” host explained why he had called Trump a “heretic to reality.”

“As a raised Catholic, the greatest sin is actually heresy because it’s not only are you astray from the right path, you’re inviting, you’re encouraging other people to come with you on that path,” the CBS star told Cooper. “He, our president, wants to live in a fantasy world where only the way he perceives the world is the way it is, the only things that serve his vision, and he’s trying to convince us that it’s the only world that exists. … He is not appealing to the better angels of our nature.”

Westlake Legal Group Stephen-COlbert Would Colbert invite Trump on his show again? 'The quick answer would be no' Joseph Wulfsohn fox-news/politics fox-news/person/stephen-colbert fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/entertainment/politics-on-late-night fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 3129c105-a6b7-5132-a3aa-05aed74de08c   Westlake Legal Group Stephen-COlbert Would Colbert invite Trump on his show again? 'The quick answer would be no' Joseph Wulfsohn fox-news/politics fox-news/person/stephen-colbert fox-news/person/donald-trump fox-news/entertainment/politics-on-late-night fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/entertainment fnc article 3129c105-a6b7-5132-a3aa-05aed74de08c

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Kamala Harris slammed for ‘politicizing’ Philadelphia standoff

Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-ac6d9d3eca004ba7b490677b8b9f7a52 Kamala Harris slammed for 'politicizing' Philadelphia standoff fox-news/politics/2020-presidential-election fox-news/politics fox-news/person/kamala-harris fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/politics fnc Brie Stimson article a0b5e6b8-4545-5089-8c64-4d47201b0913

Sen. Kamala Harris faced criticism Wednesday for promoting her campaign’s gun control plan during an appearance on CNN that coincided with breaking news about the police standoff in Philadelphia in which six officers were shot.

“When will it stop?” the 2020 Democratic presidential candidate from California asked CNN’s Wolf Blitzer when he asked for her reaction to the initial reports of the shooting.

“And I stress initial reports,” Blitzer added.

As Harris related details of her plan, information about the ongoing standoff was still sketchy.

HOURS-LONG ORDEAL ENDS IN PHILADELPHIA AFTER 6 OFFICERS WOUNDED; HOSTAGES FREED

Social media was quick to deride the presidential candidate for “politicizing” the developing situation before most of the relevant facts were known.

“After only one (1) hour Kamala Harris started talking gun control to Wolf Blizer BEFORE the Philadelphia Police had the shooter in Philadelphia out yet or BEFORE all the cops were OUT of their respective hospital yet ! I know that Harris wants to be the President but hey wait,” one person wrote.

HARRIS, WARREN FACT-CHECKED ON CLAIM MICHAEL BROWN WAS MURDERED

“Why in the world did you come out with your political statements on CNN during the standoff of police and a madman shooter in Philadelphia?? How stupid and irresponsible of you,” another tweeted.

‘You used this as a political tool while bullets were flying and two officers were trapped in the house. Just disgusting. I’m from Philadelphia, we see it real clearly,” another criticized.

One Twitter user suggested her statements weren’t worthy of a president.

“Before the facts come out you took the opportunity to pre-judge the shooter in Philadelphia … You have no clue about the gun or individual. Definitely not Presidential.”

“BEFORE IT’S EVEN RESOLVED YOUR POLITICIZING THE PHILADELPHIA SHOOTER,” another wrote.

The shooter, identified as Maurice Hill, 36, who has an extensive history of gun-related convictions.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross told reporters two officers with the Narcotics Strike Force were serving a warrant when the shooter opened fire at the home.

All of the wounded officers were expected to recover.

Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-ac6d9d3eca004ba7b490677b8b9f7a52 Kamala Harris slammed for 'politicizing' Philadelphia standoff fox-news/politics/2020-presidential-election fox-news/politics fox-news/person/kamala-harris fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/politics fnc Brie Stimson article a0b5e6b8-4545-5089-8c64-4d47201b0913   Westlake Legal Group ContentBroker_contentid-ac6d9d3eca004ba7b490677b8b9f7a52 Kamala Harris slammed for 'politicizing' Philadelphia standoff fox-news/politics/2020-presidential-election fox-news/politics fox-news/person/kamala-harris fox-news/entertainment/media fox news fnc/politics fnc Brie Stimson article a0b5e6b8-4545-5089-8c64-4d47201b0913

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Journalist allegedly assaulted by CNN’s April Ryan’s bodyguard: I ‘felt violated’

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6073108207001_6073111204001-vs Journalist allegedly assaulted by CNN's April Ryan's bodyguard: I 'felt violated' Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/ingraham-angle fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc c2a88e6a-57ed-5a2e-af00-03a833d4f1ad article

The journalist ejected from an event where CNN political analyst April Ryan was the keynote speaker appeared exclusively on “The Ingraham Angle” on Wednesday night, saying he was injured by Ryan’s body guard just for filming the event.

“I don’t know what what the misunderstanding was but I was definitely, you know, felt violated,” Charlie Kratovil, an editor for New Brunswick Today, told guest host Jesse Watters.

CNN’S CHRIS CUOMO SEEN IN UNVERIFIED VIDEO CURSING AT MAN WHO APPARENTLY CALLED HIM ‘FREDO’

Kratovil was covering a speech given by Ryan at the 4th annual New Jersey Parent Summit, which focuses on “educating, empowering and preparing parents for our future leaders,” on Aug. 3 at The Heldrich Hotel.

After roughly three hours covering the event “without incident,” Kratovil claims he was approached by Ryan’s security guard Joel Morris who demanded he stop recording, before grabbing the camera and walking out of the ballroom and into the hotel lobby.

As Kratovil and Morris begin causing a scene, Ryan explains to the crowd, “When I speak, I don’t have news covering my speech.”

Kratovil said another journalist was recording Ryan’s speech.

Security video shows Shennell McCloud, executive director of Project Ready, the group that hosted the event, berating Kratovil and demanding he leave the hotel.

It also shows Morris forcibly pushing Kratovil toward the exit.

“I kind of snuck away to get some space from him and he chased me down grabbed my arm twisted my arm behind my back and hurt my shoulder and forearm,” Kratovil said.

Watters found the incident ironic and noted a previous tweet Ryan made in July 2018, admonishing the Trump administration for how they treat the press.

“I have never seen anything like this in this country by a President and his administration. FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. We are not in Russia or China. Our jobs are to ask questions. A lot of times questions they don’t like. What in the world???” Ryan tweeted.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Kratovil, who says he was a fan of Ryan before the incident, blasted his treatment, calling it an attack on the press.

“I think this is supremely ironic, not expected and certainly not behavior that’s befitting somebody who knows journalism. Somebody who’s been in the field for a long time. She wouldn’t want to be treated like that. So I don’t see why she can come into my community and have her people come in and violate our laws like that,” Kratovil said.

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6073108207001_6073111204001-vs Journalist allegedly assaulted by CNN's April Ryan's bodyguard: I 'felt violated' Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/ingraham-angle fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc c2a88e6a-57ed-5a2e-af00-03a833d4f1ad article   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6073108207001_6073111204001-vs Journalist allegedly assaulted by CNN's April Ryan's bodyguard: I 'felt violated' Victor Garcia fox-news/shows/ingraham-angle fox-news/media/fox-news-flash fox-news/media fox news fnc/media fnc c2a88e6a-57ed-5a2e-af00-03a833d4f1ad article

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072921449001_6072879108001-vs Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional fox-news/us/personal-freedoms/second-amendment fox-news/us/crime/mass-murder fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc ef4925dc-7525-5336-b144-b1b2cbc96f6d article Andrew Napolitano

When tragedy strikes, as it did in two mass killings this month, there is always the urge to pressure the government do something.

Governments are animated by the belief that doing something — any demonstrable overt behavior — will show that they are in control. I understand the natural fears that good folks have that an El Paso or a Dayton episode might happen again, but doing something for the sake of appearance can be dangerous to personal liberty.

When the Constitution was written, the idea of owning arms and keeping them in the home was widespread. The colonists had just defeated the armies of King George III. The colonial weapon of choice was the Kentucky long rifle, while British soldiers used their army-issued version of Brown Bessies.

TRUMP NEGOTIATING WITH SENATE DEMS ON GUNS

Each rifle had its advantages, but the Kentucky (it was actually a German design, perfected and manufactured in Pennsylvania) was able to strike a British soldier at 200 yards, a startlingly long distance at the time. The Bessies were good for only about 80 yards.

Put aside the advantages we had of the passionate defense of freedom and homeland, to say nothing of superior leadership. It doesn’t take any advanced understanding of mathematics or ballistics to appreciate why we won the Revolution.

It is a matter of historical fact that the colonists won the war largely by superior firepower.

Six years after the war was over, delegates met in Philadelphia in secret and drafted what was to become the Constitution. The document, largely written in James Madison’s hand, was then submitted to Congress and to the states, which began the process of ratification.

More from Judge Andrew Napolitano

By then, Americans had already formed two basic political parties. The Federalists wanted a muscular central government and the Anti-Federalists wanted a loose confederation of states.

The concept of a “red flag” law — which permits the confiscation of lawfully owned weapons from a person because of what the person might do — violates both the presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of proof of criminal behavior before liberty can be infringed.

Yet the memory of a Parliament that behaved as if it could write any law, tax any event and impair any liberty, coupled with the fear that the new government here might drift toward tyranny, gave birth to the first 10 amendments to the Constitution — the Bill of Rights.

The debate over the Bill of Rights was not about rights; that debate had been resolved in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence declared our basic human rights to be inalienable. The Bill of Rights debates were about whether the federal government needed restraints imposed upon it in the Constitution itself.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER

The Federalists thought the Bill of Rights was superfluous because they argued that no American government would knowingly restrict freedom. The Anti-Federalists thought constitutional restraints were vital to the preservation of personal liberty because no government can be trusted to preserve personal liberty.

Second among the personal liberties preserved in the Bill of Rights from impairment by the government was the right to self-defense. Thomas Jefferson called that the right to self-preservation.

Fast-forward to today, and we see the widespread and decidedly un-American reaction to the tragedies of El Paso and Dayton. Both mass murders were animated by hatred and planned by madness. But because both were carried out using weapons that look like those issued by the military, Democrats have called for the outright confiscation of these weapons.

Where is the constitutional authority for that? In a word: nowhere.

The government’s job is to preserve personal liberty. Does it do its job when it weakens personal liberty instead? Stated differently, how does confiscating weapons from the law-abiding conceivably reduce the ability of madmen to get those weapons? When did madmen begin obeying gun laws?

These arguments against confiscation have largely resonated with Republicans. Yet — because they feel they must do something — they have fallen for the concept of limited confiscation, known by the euphemism of “red flag” laws.

The concept of a “red flag” law — which permits the confiscation of lawfully owned weapons from a person because of what the person might do — violates both the presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of proof of criminal behavior before liberty can be infringed.

The presumption of innocence puts the burden for proving a case on the government. Because the case to be proven — might the gun owner be dangerous? — if proven, will result in the loss of a fundamental liberty, the presumption of innocence also mandates that the case be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Republican proposal lowers the standard of proof to a preponderance of the evidence — “a more likely than not” standard. That was done because it is impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an event might happen. This is exactly why the “might happen standard” is unconstitutional and alien to our jurisprudence.

In 2008 Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the Supreme Court that the right to keep and bear arms in the home is an individual pre-political right. Due process demands that this level of right — we are not talking about the privilege of a driving a car on a government street — can only be taken away after a jury conviction or a guilty plea to a felony.

The “might happen” standard of “red flag” laws violates this basic principle. The same Supreme Court case also reflects the Kentucky long gun lesson. The people are entitled to own and possess the same arms as the government; for the same reason as the colonists did — to fight off tyrants should they seize liberty or property.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

If the government can impair Second Amendment-protected liberties on the basis of what a person might do — as opposed to what a person actually did do — to show that it is doing something in response to a public clamor, then no liberty in America is safe.

Which liberty will the government infringe upon next?

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072921449001_6072879108001-vs Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional fox-news/us/personal-freedoms/second-amendment fox-news/us/crime/mass-murder fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc ef4925dc-7525-5336-b144-b1b2cbc96f6d article Andrew Napolitano   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072921449001_6072879108001-vs Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional fox-news/us/personal-freedoms/second-amendment fox-news/us/crime/mass-murder fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc ef4925dc-7525-5336-b144-b1b2cbc96f6d article Andrew Napolitano

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072921449001_6072879108001-vs Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional fox-news/us/personal-freedoms/second-amendment fox-news/us/crime/mass-murder fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc ef4925dc-7525-5336-b144-b1b2cbc96f6d article Andrew Napolitano

When tragedy strikes, as it did in two mass killings this month, there is always the urge to pressure the government do something.

Governments are animated by the belief that doing something — any demonstrable overt behavior — will show that they are in control. I understand the natural fears that good folks have that an El Paso or a Dayton episode might happen again, but doing something for the sake of appearance can be dangerous to personal liberty.

When the Constitution was written, the idea of owning arms and keeping them in the home was widespread. The colonists had just defeated the armies of King George III. The colonial weapon of choice was the Kentucky long rifle, while British soldiers used their army-issued version of Brown Bessies.

TRUMP NEGOTIATING WITH SENATE DEMS ON GUNS

Each rifle had its advantages, but the Kentucky (it was actually a German design, perfected and manufactured in Pennsylvania) was able to strike a British soldier at 200 yards, a startlingly long distance at the time. The Bessies were good for only about 80 yards.

Put aside the advantages we had of the passionate defense of freedom and homeland, to say nothing of superior leadership. It doesn’t take any advanced understanding of mathematics or ballistics to appreciate why we won the Revolution.

It is a matter of historical fact that the colonists won the war largely by superior firepower.

Six years after the war was over, delegates met in Philadelphia in secret and drafted what was to become the Constitution. The document, largely written in James Madison’s hand, was then submitted to Congress and to the states, which began the process of ratification.

More from Judge Andrew Napolitano

By then, Americans had already formed two basic political parties. The Federalists wanted a muscular central government and the Anti-Federalists wanted a loose confederation of states.

The concept of a “red flag” law — which permits the confiscation of lawfully owned weapons from a person because of what the person might do — violates both the presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of proof of criminal behavior before liberty can be infringed.

Yet the memory of a Parliament that behaved as if it could write any law, tax any event and impair any liberty, coupled with the fear that the new government here might drift toward tyranny, gave birth to the first 10 amendments to the Constitution — the Bill of Rights.

The debate over the Bill of Rights was not about rights; that debate had been resolved in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence declared our basic human rights to be inalienable. The Bill of Rights debates were about whether the federal government needed restraints imposed upon it in the Constitution itself.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER

The Federalists thought the Bill of Rights was superfluous because they argued that no American government would knowingly restrict freedom. The Anti-Federalists thought constitutional restraints were vital to the preservation of personal liberty because no government can be trusted to preserve personal liberty.

Second among the personal liberties preserved in the Bill of Rights from impairment by the government was the right to self-defense. Thomas Jefferson called that the right to self-preservation.

Fast-forward to today, and we see the widespread and decidedly un-American reaction to the tragedies of El Paso and Dayton. Both mass murders were animated by hatred and planned by madness. But because both were carried out using weapons that look like those issued by the military, Democrats have called for the outright confiscation of these weapons.

Where is the constitutional authority for that? In a word: nowhere.

The government’s job is to preserve personal liberty. Does it do its job when it weakens personal liberty instead? Stated differently, how does confiscating weapons from the law-abiding conceivably reduce the ability of madmen to get those weapons? When did madmen begin obeying gun laws?

These arguments against confiscation have largely resonated with Republicans. Yet — because they feel they must do something — they have fallen for the concept of limited confiscation, known by the euphemism of “red flag” laws.

The concept of a “red flag” law — which permits the confiscation of lawfully owned weapons from a person because of what the person might do — violates both the presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of proof of criminal behavior before liberty can be infringed.

The presumption of innocence puts the burden for proving a case on the government. Because the case to be proven — might the gun owner be dangerous? — if proven, will result in the loss of a fundamental liberty, the presumption of innocence also mandates that the case be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Republican proposal lowers the standard of proof to a preponderance of the evidence — “a more likely than not” standard. That was done because it is impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an event might happen. This is exactly why the “might happen standard” is unconstitutional and alien to our jurisprudence.

In 2008 Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the Supreme Court that the right to keep and bear arms in the home is an individual pre-political right. Due process demands that this level of right — we are not talking about the privilege of a driving a car on a government street — can only be taken away after a jury conviction or a guilty plea to a felony.

The “might happen” standard of “red flag” laws violates this basic principle. The same Supreme Court case also reflects the Kentucky long gun lesson. The people are entitled to own and possess the same arms as the government; for the same reason as the colonists did — to fight off tyrants should they seize liberty or property.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

If the government can impair Second Amendment-protected liberties on the basis of what a person might do — as opposed to what a person actually did do — to show that it is doing something in response to a public clamor, then no liberty in America is safe.

Which liberty will the government infringe upon next?

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO

Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072921449001_6072879108001-vs Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional fox-news/us/personal-freedoms/second-amendment fox-news/us/crime/mass-murder fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc ef4925dc-7525-5336-b144-b1b2cbc96f6d article Andrew Napolitano   Westlake Legal Group 694940094001_6072921449001_6072879108001-vs Judge Andrew Napolitano: Gun confiscation under “red flag” laws is unconstitutional fox-news/us/personal-freedoms/second-amendment fox-news/us/crime/mass-murder fox-news/opinion fox news fnc/opinion fnc ef4925dc-7525-5336-b144-b1b2cbc96f6d article Andrew Napolitano

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com