Should Attorney General Holder Read Laws Before Commenting on Them?

  • News
  • Thread starter WhoWee
  • Start date
  • Tags
    General
In summary, Attorney General Eric Holder has faced criticism for commenting on Arizona's immigration law without actually reading it. Some believe that he was given a summary of the law by a staffer and felt pressured to make comments without fully familiarizing himself with the legislation. This behavior has been seen on both sides of the political spectrum and can lead to important details being overlooked, such as pork barrel projects being slipped into bills. The Arizona immigration law in question is actually only about ten pages long.
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Some staffer probably gave him news stories and a summary on it. He is a busy man I assume and does not have time to read all legislation from various states. Of course he certainly ought not be commenting on it if he has not actually read it. He was probably under pressure to make comments and made the stupid decision to go ahead and make them without properly familiarizing himself.
 
  • #3
There seems to be far too much of this behavior going on lately - on both sides.
 
  • #4
Holder is a pale shadow of Mukasey. Obama kept Gates, he should have kept Mukasey too.
 
  • #5
Well you got a team of lawyers sitting around writting these up and you end up with 100s or 1000s of pages of mumbo jumbo. I wouldn't read that crap if i was a politician. The sad thing is is this is how pork barrel projects can be so easily slipped into bills - because no one actually reads the darn things!
 
  • #6
BishopUser said:
Well you got a team of lawyers sitting around writting these up and you end up with 100s or 1000s of pages of mumbo jumbo. I wouldn't read that crap if i was a politician. The sad thing is is this is how pork barrel projects can be so easily slipped into bills - because no one actually reads the darn things!

The bill in question is actually quite short. About ten pages I think the article said.
 

1. What is the role of the Attorney General in making comments?

The Attorney General is the chief legal officer of a government and is responsible for representing the government in legal matters. Their role in making comments is to provide legal analysis and advice on issues related to the government's policies and actions.

2. Can the Attorney General's comments influence court decisions?

Yes, the Attorney General's comments can have an impact on court decisions. Their legal expertise and analysis can help shape the arguments presented in court and influence the judge's decision.

3. Are the Attorney General's comments legally binding?

No, the Attorney General's comments are not legally binding. They are, however, highly regarded as they represent the government's official legal position on a particular issue.

4. How are Attorney General comments different from court opinions?

Court opinions are official judgments issued by a court on a specific legal issue, while Attorney General comments are legal opinions provided by the government's chief legal officer on issues related to government policies and actions. Court opinions have a direct impact on legal cases, while Attorney General comments provide guidance and advice.

5. Can the Attorney General's comments be challenged or overturned?

Yes, the Attorney General's comments can be challenged or overturned, just like any other legal opinion. They are not legally binding, and if a court or other legal authority finds that the comments are not legally sound, they can be overturned.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
24
Views
9K
  • General Discussion
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
91
Views
14K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
70
Views
11K
Back
Top