Phill Kline’s former deputy attorney general, Bryan Brown, plans to open an anti-abortion, public-interest law firm in a former abortion clinic in Fort Wayne, Ind. As Eagle reporter Dion Lefler noted, it’s an odd homecoming. The clinic won a $61,600 judgment against Brown in 1990, which Brown refused to pay. The fine eventually became uncollectible after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal racketeering laws couldn’t apply to abortion demonstrators.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- sursum on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- KSGolfnut on Whose ‘unchecked spending’?
- outlander on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
27 Comments
See bjbrownsblog.blogspot.com for the rest of the story and deeper in the blog for stories that never made it into the Kansas media.
Including my arrests and a primer on consumer protection management.
And, I should add, the $61.6 k was made uncollectable by the S.Ct. in Bray v. Alexandria in ‘94, by abandonment and state law in 2001, and then a third fashion thru the RICO cases. In other words, that ordering of attorneys fees to be paid directly to the abortionists was wrong on multiple counts. More on this blog for those interested. Search Rosa Parks and Bryan Brown for the rest of the story.
Bjb blog must be lonely blog since he has to pimp it here. Maybe he can relieve us of the all abortion all the time wingnuts here?
Yes, please, go to lonely blog. We’ll be glad you did.
And the supremes who bailed out bjb? Would those be more of the act-ee-vist judges you wingnuts hate so much?
hypocrit much?
I’m just glad he will be in Indiana and not Kansas. These wacko fanatics always land on their feet. But I agree with the comment about the activist judges. The religious nuts don’t like activist judges unless, of course, one of those activist judges saves their own butt.
More empty pallet ad hominem comments by the Liberal Left party of appeasement.
yes, the terrorist clinic people are free to terrorize some more. But that’s ok isn’t it Bryan? God wants you to kill the killers right? How many bombers are part of operation rescue now?Rosa Parks you are NOT, it’s despicable that you try to equate yourself with her. She’s a woman and we know you hate them afterall.
Well, thanks a lot, cat, for wishing him on Indiana. I mean – we already have the KKK and a federal pen where they execute death penalty prisoners. It only seems fair that you keep the anti-abortionists there in Kansas along with the Phreaky Phred Phelps Phamily;-)
Gee Bryan, now that the judgment is “uncollectible” maybe you can own property in your name instead of your wife’s now? And hey, here’s a question for you…when are you going to reimburse the taxpayers for all your self-aggrandizing protests back in 1991/1992? That’s a lot more than a measly $61K. Send your check to City of Wichita / Sedgwick County.
Yer right cat. And, OMG, he is aligning himself with Rosa Parks? Wassa matter boy, ERIC RUDOLPH is all booked up this week so you cant align yourself with him.
Because the difference between bjb and eric rudolph is not much…
Jesus wept. I bet Rosa would appreciate THAT! NOT!
Activist judges?
Actually, it was pretty clear cut, legally.If the Court(s) had sided against Brown, that would have been VERY activist.
I am more familiar with the KKK act then I am with the RICO act.
In the KKK act, written to, I quote: “Protect Catholics, Republicans and Negroes in the Reconstruction South” CLASS-BASED ANIMUS was required, in other words, the plaintiff had to show class based hatred. Hard to do, since many of those arrested in prolife protests have had abortions themselves and regret it! (This was one of the arguements used in Court to beat our own Activist Judge Pat Kelly and others!)Also, under the KKK Act, the actions had to take place “Under color of law.” In other words, some government branch had to be directing or promoting the protests.Of course, the KKK act could not stand up against Operation Rescue!
Now the RICO act. My understanding there is that RICO suits had to show a profit motive by the defendents.Agree or disagree with OR theology and tactics.However, OR is motivated by religious beliefs and sincere civil rights beliefs. They BELIEVE that abortion is murder.
You dont have to agree with them.
However, the law REQUIRES that the motive be purely financial, criminally financial.
RICO suits also failed.
The term “Activist Judge” does not mean that the judge ruled against your personal belief.
The term “Activist Judge” applies to judges that ignore the requirments of the law.
By the way:
Years ago, at a Downtown Lions Club lunch, I once asked Nola Foulston why she did not bring RICO suits against gang-bangers.
She said, pretty much, that only the US Attorney could do that.
Funny, Planned Parenthood and other abortionists did not use the offices of the US Attorney to bring THEIR suits against OR!
Gang bangers kill people, they destroy property, they ruin property values and hurt the tax base. Meth and Crack do a fair amount of damage as well, to our medical community. We all pay taxes, which are higher due to drug-related gang activity.
Granted, it could take some work, as drug pushers deal more in cash than in bank accounts that could be easily frozen.
Still, RICO was inacted to take away some of the financial incentive of organized crime, by going after assets.
If we seized a few homes and cars and guns and a little “bling” from some of our local bangers, I think it would make a real difference.
I truly believe that ANYONE who can show injury from gang activity would have standing to sue, but that would be a lengthy and costly process for any individual to undertake.
Our AG and our DA both HAVE the resources to do this.
“No file Nola”, I hereby challenge you, once again!
Econ,
How can a county DA bring charges under Federal statute?
The Wichita Eagle is giving domestic terrorists their own blog space now, great. It’s bad enough that they’ll report their press release as news and accept all their lies as facts. The only good news is Brown is leaving Kansas so maybe now the skidmark he left in this state can be cleansed.
Tom
HOW DID PLANNED PARENTHOOD SUE UNDER FEDERAL STATUTE?
We ALL have the right to sue under federal statute.
Collectively, states and counties and cities have the right to sue under federal statute.
RICO has a CIVIL COURT process. I can bring suit under RICO if I want to pay my attorney to do so!
The bigotry on this blog and in this filthy rag is pathetic.
Welcome to Wichita, birthplace of the Fourth Reich. Heil yourselves, kids.
And this inane non-sequitor has what to do with this debate except to reinforce the point I made about the neo-Nazi mentality of this rag and it’s devoted readers?
Godwin’s Law on ‘not-so-gentle’
Besides, why would you care about Eric Rudolph? We actually enforce the law against those who break it, unlike the leftist trash currently holding the offices of city and district attorney.
Wichita, come, molest our children.
So,
Every enviromentalist has to support the Unibomber or Earth First?
Every Civil Rights leader has to support Louis Farrakan or the Black Panther Party?
Every labor union member supports squirting paint thinner on “scab” cars or putting nails in the driveway, during a strike?
Horst, grow up will you?
Re Godwin’s Law, if the swastika fits, and in the case of The Eagle and many of the twerps on this blog………
Sorry folks, time to go communicate with the saner members of New Berlin society. By now.
The Christian terrorist Eric Rudolph (probably one of Bryan’s heros) still terrorizes his victims from behind bars.
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=3172717
Yup, these are the sorts of people Kline hires and the Eagle lavishes attention upon.
I wonder what kinds of reforms might be made in adoption laws to facilitate that option – both for the birth mother AND the adoptive parents. Perhaps that might be an interesting area of ‘pro bono’ practice.
Horst
I thought you were trying to say ALL pro-life people supported violence against abortionists.
That is not correct.
I am not used to seeing your posts.
Usually, when someone brings up the truely violent acts of a very few anti-abortion types, the poster is not friendly to the pro-life cause.
In other words, you do more harm than good if your desire is to change minds.
Paul – I put Horst in the same catagory as the Unibomber and McVeigh.
I would love to see the nuts do something to promote where women can really keep their babies or give them up for adoption. The hard part comes after they’re born- and that’s when they’re dumped on their butts.
Get fathers out of the equation, and let women decide when a child gets adopted out. But we also need to protect the adoptive parents..and make it no take backs. When you sign that paper, it’s over.
No husband has ever been shot while doing the dishes. Thanks good site.http://gfrgfx.awesomewebspace.com/924ede/map.html