From: Brian Davis <bdavis@thepoint.net>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 1996 12:40:13 +0800
To: Dave Farber <farber@central.cis.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: A Cyberspace Independence Refutation
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960217235252.00ce4398@linc.cis.upenn.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960217233246.26862Q-100000@mercury.thepoint.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Sat, 17 Feb 1996, Dave Farber wrote:

> The President can not rule anything unconstitutional. He can tell justice
> not to enforce it but sometime local federal prosecutors do what they want

U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President.  U.S. Attorneys 
cannot fire their Assistants -- they can only recommend such action to 
the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General.

EBD

> and some future administration can decide to enforce it. Only the courts or
> the congress can change things for sure.
> 
> Dave
> 
> At 03:20 PM 2/17/96 -0800, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
> >jamesd@echeque.com said:
> >>
> >>j> 1.  President Clinton declared CDA unconstitutional and directed
> >>j> the Justice department to refrain from enforcing it.
> >
> >At 01:57 PM 2/16/96 -0600, Sten Drescher wrote:
> >>	Then why is the Justice Department defending it? 
> >
> >Sorry:  My error.  As you pointed out he ruled *part* of the
> >CDA unconstitutional -- a part that no one expected to be
> >enforced anyway
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >              				|  
> >We have the right to defend ourselves	|   http://www.jim.com/jamesd/
> >and our property, because of the kind	|  
> >of animals that we are. True law	|   James A. Donald
> >derives from this right, not from the	|  
> >arbitrary power of the state.		|   jamesd@echeque.com
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 

Not a lawyer on the Net, although I play one in real life.
**********************************************************
Flame away! I get treated worse in person every day!!