While I agree with the assessments above, this also bothers me to no end. She didn't break any laws, did she? Why should she be punished?

The early returns on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals' sweeping "recess appointments" decisions are not favorable. Kenneth Jost of CQ Press called it "astounding." The three-judge panel went "on a tear," he adds. Jeffrey Toobin of the New Yorker called it an "extravagant act of judicial hubris," in which "three federal judges revealed themselves as Republican National Committeemen in robes." Prominent separation-of-powers theorist Peter Shane posted not one, or even two, but three criticisms of the decision. Noel Canning v. National Labor Relations Board, he wrote, "is a little like a Rob Schneider movie -- the more you think about it, the worse it seems."

Even some right-of-center commentators have expressed mixed emotions. In a Federalist Society podcast after the decision, Chapman University professor John Eastman praised the decision as a check on executive power tyranny. Michael Rappaport of the University of San Diego defends the decision against charges of partisanship, and told me in an email that he found the analysis basically correct.
But Michael Greve of George Mason wrote that the opinion seemed "a tad doctrinaire." Writing in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required), John Yoo, formerly of the Bush Justice Department, blamed President Obama for setting up the situation, but cautioned that the opinion "has jeopardized a vital executive power for all future presidents." John Elwood, also a former Bush Justice official, mildly noted that "the panel would have benefited" from actual briefing on the questions it decided...

I haven't read the decision Lilo, but the history of Article IV does lend itself somewhat to understanding the court's decision. I believe it was the Committee on Postponed Parts that composed the recess appointments provision of the Constitution. It was intended to allow the President the latitude to keep the federal government up and running when the Congress was not in session. That makes sense. Of course, it has evolved into a political maneuver which the Founding Fathers did not antiicpate that it would. Thus, I support the court's decision even if not the way it expressed it. The President should have waited.

You think this winds up in the Supreme Court eventually? Next year maybe?

It seems like he really took offense at her telling him adios. Maybe he thought she was mocking his accent or presuming familiarity. In any event it was a mistake on her part. I thought he overreacted a bit by doubling the bail. But of course the critical error on her part, besides possibly being high, was then cursing at the judge. Not a good idea. So the contempt charge was obvious.

I haven't had much reason to be in front of judges but I don't like the idea of someone being able to double your bail because they didn't like that you said "adios". But those are the breaks. She will have 30 days to think about her mistakes..

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/did-you-say-f...cursing-at-him/

It seems like he really took offense at her telling him adios. Maybe he thought she was mocking his accent or presuming familiarity. In any event it was a mistake on her part. I thought he overreacted a bit by doubling the bail. But of course the critical error on her part, besides possibly being high, was then cursing at the judge. Not a good idea. So the contempt charge was obvious.

I haven't had much reason to be in front of judges but I don't like the idea of someone being able to double your bail because they didn't like that you said "adios". But those are the breaks. She will have 30 days to think about her mistakes..

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/did-you-say-f...cursing-at-him/

Kly, the LA DA has issued an arrest warrant for Dorner that allows him to be arrested anywhere and without bail. Why? Arrest warrants are serviceable anywhere, aren't they? Also, bail is a function of arraignment correct?

The beat goes on:

"Three people were killed and another wounded by a California gunman who went an on early morning spree of shooting and carjackings before he killed himself when confronted by police.

Police in Tustin, Calif., have yet to identify the shooter as they work several crime scenes where the gunman stole cars and shot at people using two rifles."

Kly and DT:

The jury in the Jodi Arias trial submitted almost 200 questions to the judge. I thought such a submission was only permitted during deliberations.

Kly, don't you think that it also indicates the juries distrust of the defendant's testimony? Also, I quite object to jurors asking questions of witnesses for the reasons you cite.

By the way, when I was foreman of a murder jury, we sent a question to the judge asking him if we could ask a question. He said yes we could. The question was whether one of the witnesses had been sworn in.