Chief judge's question

Question

CHIEF JUDGE:Is there any precedent for exercising equitable jurisdiction, and a pre-indictment scenario where there's no showing that the seizure itself was unlawful?From the MSNBC video.Could anyone, please, explain in plain English what the chief judge said when asking the cited question?

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

fold navy 286Could anyone, please, explain in plain English what the chief judge said when asking the cited question?

The transcription is wrong. He really said "Is there any precedent for exercising equitable jurisdiction in a pre-indictment scenario where there's no showing that the seizure itself was unlawful?"

Precedent is a principle in law that relies on there having been similar matters before the court in the past and heavily favors the same final rulings in present cases.

"Equitable jurisdiction" refers to a principle in jurisprudence that supersedes common law and statute law, called equity. If you are interested, you should look into it. I am no lawyer, and I imagine whole books have been written on the subject,

The judge's use of "showing" is not standard. It is a legal term. The OED has for "showing" "U.S. Law. An application or plea for some action to be taken, esp. postponement of a proceeding. Now rare." He meant that the first step had not been taken, that of asking for a postponement on the grounds that the search was illegal.

So:

"Is there a previous case similar to this one where law was set aside in favor of equity before there was an indictment, such case being that no motion had been brought concerning the lawfulness of a search?"

My paraphrase is necessarily faulty. The judge said it clearly and correctly the first time.

Chief judge's question

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions