Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the United States, the person receiving the subpoena has the right to protest the subpoena. The party issuing the subpoena then has to make the case in front of a judge that it is necessary.
You confuse it with a warrant.
"I dont want too" is not a defense.
"I do this for a living and forcing me to do it for free is a violation of my rights" IS a defense.
Nunberg is not a professional witness. If he does this it will get him contempt and jail.
I dont know why you keep trying to act like he is a professional witness. that is not the topic here.
WOW this guy is a drunk. Erin Burnnet said she smells alcohol on his breath. Are you drinking? He says no.
That is generally the limit of Erin Burnnet's investigative journalism skills. I don't know why you guys think you are going to learn anything useful from those yoyos.
Ya, let due process play out and the Constitution is very clear about forcing anyone to speak.
A warrant is enforceable, a summons/subpoena isn't. Sure a judge can hassle you, and force you through a warrant to answer, but then I was never accused of a crime to answer for in the first place. Am I being detained? For what crime? Not speaking is not a crime.
I think you have a warrant to appear before the court, conflated with a summons to appear before the court.
To avoid my fees, lawyers try that crap with me all the time, thinking I will be intimidated....
A subpoena is mandatory process. You can move to quash. You can negotiate scope with the party that issued the subpoena. You cannot outright refuse compliance. You will be in contempt. In contempt, you can be subject to imprisonment until you comply and/or fines. If Nunberg refuses to comply, he can expect federal martials to arrest him and put him in jail while he awaits his contempt hearing. At his contempt hearing, he will either change his tune (and be subject to fine), or he will remain in jail until he decides to comply.
If he ignores it he most certainly can be charged with contempt and go to jail.
Asks journalists who have, in fact, gone to jail rather than reveal a source.
He's talking big--and he will cave.
He will never be thrown in jail. Most cases he will not even have to go down and make bond. That is all lawyer stuff, the lawyers do for their clients in this case. Sometimes they are with upon surrender.
Rarely will they send police to your house, over a procedural crime as contempt.
Like I said, judges can be dicks, but the ramifications for them doing so is a great detriment to their careers.
OMG!!! Have you ever seen anything like that? Then he said he hadn't taken anything except his antidepressant meds!
Nope BUT I think he is singing like a Canary.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
