Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

[Yansuf]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Case No 4 is a property dispute with a twist.

 

The Supreme Court is being asked to decide a property ownership case which the other courts have kicked upstairs as it is so irregular.

Jane 'Femmebot' Doe is being defended by the ACLU (or similar body) as being a sentient human being and therefore not subject to ownership by a corporation or a person; Doctor Bot via his legal representatives claim that she is his property and she should be given over to him; Megacorp claim that she belongs to them after femmebots belonging to Doctor Bot were legally salvaged by them and that due to an experiment in their laboratory she came to life.

The facts are these

(1) She is human and passes any and all tests to show that she is

(2) Doctor Bot does indeed have Femmebots which are not involved in crimes and stay at his bases or very rarely accompany him. They provide him with all sorts of entertainment including exactly what you are thinking. The Femmebots do not have machine guns or detonate as bombs (as in Austin Powers). Lawyers argue that they only have the Doctor's word for that.

(3) The Justice Crusader has an ongoing feud with Doctor Bot and makes a point of trashing the Doctor's bases and belongings. He has confirmed that he destroyed any femmebots he finds because they can be used for illegal purposes and scattered the wreckage. (Lawyers for Megacorp and Doctor Bot try to get him to admit that he destroyed the robots as he found them immoral. He maintained that is just the potential for illegality)

(4) Jane 'femmebot' Doe has no records in the system at all for birth certificate, social security ID, schooling etc and no memory of growing up. She does have the memories of being a robot. These include being disassembled by Justice Crusader. Before she shut down she saw her body parts were scattered about the place, arms and legs ripped out. She does not know why she is now flesh after being a robot. She has no memories of being at Megacorp.

(5) She cannot confirm any self defence or offence capabilities as a robot.

(6) Megacorp has a contract with various states to salvage technology and put it to good use. They also neutralize things for the US Govt if it proves to be hazardous. They have legal contracts to salvage equipment from what are or were Dr Bots's bases.

(7) Although Dr Bot is alleged to have committed crimes he has never been been tried or convicted even in absentia.

(8) Jane has a tattoo which Dr Bot has proven comes from a specific ink and process unique to him. Therefore she is his.

(9) The Doctor has no knowledge of how she came to be human but in a superhuman world all is possible. If she is returned to him he will look after her. Megacorp are making no such promises.

(10) Megacorp says they salvaged her and due to a highly technical accident in the lab with experimental technology she came to life. They do not deny that she was Dr Bot's property beforehand (the tattoo) but as it was their work that made her human she belongs to them. They have a responsibility.

(11) Jane is not keen on going back to Megacorp or Dr Bot.

(12) Somebody attacked Megacorp's labs before Jane was discovered and some of what was salvaged from Dr Bot was destroyed.

(13) INS want to kick her out of the country as an illegal alien if she is not the property of Dr Bot or Megacorp.

(14) Megacorp has friends in Congress and the Senate who are pleading their case in private to the Supreme Court justices in private.

 

And then there is what nobody knows

 

 

Dr Bot and The Justice Crusader have a common enemy that neither knows about. He is a reality warper. After The Justice Crusader trashed one of Dr Bot's places, the warper came in and removed one of the bots. He put it back together again and warped reality so that she became flesh. He had to disappear before he was found so he had to abandon her. That is how she came to be.

Megacorp did salvage the other remains, are aware of Dr Bot's work and did get attacked by someone intent on theft (they were good enough that no-one caught them on camera or other security device). However the rest is a pack of lies. They have not been caught out and some of the people they are using to press the case do not know that they are accomplices to falsehood.

 

 

In the light of what people do know who the Supreme Court say is Jane 'Femmebot' Doe's owner ? assume for sake of clarity the Justices as a whole are not swayed by Megacorp's efforts and do not hold it against them.

 

If she tests as human, it is completely unbelievable that she would not be considered human; therefore holding her in "involuntary servitude" (legal definition of slavery in the US) would be a felony.

[Yansuf]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

A touch of thread necromancy here as I have several legal based questions and potential scenario ideas. The second of these ties into one of the earlier megaplayboy hypotheticals and the first two tie in with the legal frame work set out in the Stronghold book.

 

After the landmark Supreme Court ruling which decided whether Aliens, Robots, the Undead and various others had rights under the constitution, some parties were left put out. Vampires found that as Undead they had no rights and decided to do something about it. Meanwhile various parties saw this as an ideal way to rid themselves of the scourge of the undead for good and were pressing for laws to eradicate the Undead like the three strikes laws in California. If they commit a crime three times they can be eradicated. The first legislation that came before the Supreme Court was struck down as the justices saw it would be used against others as well as any undead that were being targeted.

The vampires themselves saw the traps being laid and so tried various things themselves to stop what was happening. Concern was raised due to the success of things like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Twilight (vampires can't survive in sunlight despite what some fiction says). One vampire however turned to the law and sought to have punishment defined for Vampires particularly. What she put before the court was that vampires should be subject to the same tests of evidence that everyone else is and not just 'Oh they had a throat wound, it must be a vampire !'. Forensic evidence of DNA also tied into the undead and bite radius could easily be established for example. Also if a three strikes law was promulgated then a vampire can't be targeted for something as basic as parking tickets and littering and then staked on the third instance, it has to be for the same sort of serious crimes that other criminals would be targeted. Any law needs to be Federal in order to stop local authorities deciding what is and isn't evidence and a breach of the three strikes rule due to the religious beliefs across the country.

The laws could also be set to govern mind control by vampire and whether that is covered as a variety of rape.

 

In light of this would the Supreme Court say such a law was constitutional and that anti-vampire laws which allowed a lazy interpretation of three strikes would be struck down ?

Remember some vampires are tax payers.

 

If Vampires were excluded from the definition of "person", then it is likely that SCOTUS would not touch this issue. (Note that it is a big "if" there.)

[Yansuf]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Legal question and scenario idea no 2 and this harkens back to secret identity.

 

The Feral Kat is an outlaw whose fingerprints and other DNA are held on record. She is charismatic and makes good copy for the papers and television. Her name however is Jane Doe as nothing of her background has been pinpointed to date.

Electric Justice is a killer vigilante who has hunted down and killed 'those who break the law'. It is rumoured that some law enforcement officials are helping him and others turn a blind eye to his activities even though he is committing what amounts to murder. During his last little outing he killed a family who it was claimed were associates and confederates of the criminal Black Crow. The Crow got away. The family were Mexican immigrants. Electric Justice shows no compassion for the killing saying that collateral damage is unavoidable and that those who harbour, foster and associate with criminals cannot expect the same treatment as law abiding citizens. The police have condemned his actions and various supers have vowed to bring him in.

Feral Kat has heard that Electric Justice is targetting her and so brings up this legal quandry. She goes to court seeking to prevent any identity she uses being accessed under the Freedom of Information Act. Her point is that if it falls into the wrong hands (ie Electric Justice), he is likely to kill others in an effort to get to her. The ends cannot justify the means. Also if a mistake is made with the name say Joan Smith, Electric Justice may well wipe out one or more innocent families just to get to her. Feral Kat makes the point that she is aware that the law would be wide ranging and affect newspapers etc. While an identity is still not public knowledge, it should be illegal for someone to pass on a potential name to an interested third party ie the FBI and police have a right to that information but the Washington Times does not while it is unconfirmed. Similarly law enforcement officials including office staff should be prosecuted for passing on the 'potential' name to a killer vigilante or in the case of a hero to their arch-enemy ie Viper.

 

I realise that there may be two legal points here and there are the issues of Freedom of the Press to consider. That being said can criminals be protected against the Freedom of Information Act ?

 

It is likely that she would win; there is already precedent for this.

Note that this does not prevent a newspaper from publishing her ID, the original question was about releasing information under the "freedom of information" act. That applies to the government only.

Since the government has been unable to get court orders to stop newspapers from printing "leaked" info even when it IDs undercover agents, there is no way the court would order prior restraint of publication, unless you wish to postulate a VERY different world from ours.

[Heroic Halfwit]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

A touch of thread necromancy here as I have several legal based questions and potential scenario ideas. The second of these ties into one of the earlier megaplayboy hypotheticals and the first two tie in with the legal frame work set out in the Stronghold book.

 

After the landmark Supreme Court ruling which decided whether Aliens, Robots, the Undead and various others had rights under the constitution, some parties were left put out. Vampires found that as Undead they had no rights and decided to do something about it. Meanwhile various parties saw this as an ideal way to rid themselves of the scourge of the undead for good and were pressing for laws to eradicate the Undead like the three strikes laws in California. If they commit a crime three times they can be eradicated. The first legislation that came before the Supreme Court was struck down as the justices saw it would be used against others as well as any undead that were being targeted.

The vampires themselves saw the traps being laid and so tried various things themselves to stop what was happening. Concern was raised due to the success of things like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Twilight (vampires can't survive in sunlight despite what some fiction says). One vampire however turned to the law and sought to have punishment defined for Vampires particularly. What she put before the court was that vampires should be subject to the same tests of evidence that everyone else is and not just 'Oh they had a throat wound, it must be a vampire !'. Forensic evidence of DNA also tied into the undead and bite radius could easily be established for example. Also if a three strikes law was promulgated then a vampire can't be targeted for something as basic as parking tickets and littering and then staked on the third instance, it has to be for the same sort of serious crimes that other criminals would be targeted. Any law needs to be Federal in order to stop local authorities deciding what is and isn't evidence and a breach of the three strikes rule due to the religious beliefs across the country.

The laws could also be set to govern mind control by vampire and whether that is covered as a variety of rape.

 

In light of this would the Supreme Court say such a law was constitutional and that anti-vampire laws which allowed a lazy interpretation of three strikes would be struck down ?

Remember some vampires are tax payers.

 

1. First we need to figure out why Vampires were not allowed rights. There are several probable rationales:

 

a. Vampires have no rights because there are in fact dead despite being able to move around and bite people.

 

b. Vampires have no rights because in the view of the Court vampires as a class of being are merely an exceedingly dangerous animal.

 

c. Vampires have no rights because in order to preserve their own existence must murder human beings.

 

d. Though human in appearance, Vampires are in fact, non-human extra dimensional invaders.

 

2. It seems, in your example that the 3 strikes law turns whatever the final offense was into the equivalent of a capital offense as the continued existence of the vampire on this planet would be terminated. The Supreme Court would never go for that as it would violate the "Cruel and Unusual Punishments" clause. What 3-strikes laws generally do is make the repeat offender inelligble for parole which is Constitutional. Further, 3-strikes laws traditionally have only applied to the commission of felonies, and even then generally only to "inherently dangerous" felonies like arson, robbery, murder, and not things like embezzlement, forgery, fraud, etc.

 

As for the evidentiary issues, the preliminary problem of what "having no rights" means in your example needs to be resolved. If Vampires have no rights at all, i.e. they are not recognized a legal persons, then it would not be a crime to kill them. Similarly, a non person (remember corporations are legal persons) cannot commit a crime, and even if they could would not be entitled to a trial rendering the evidentiary issues moots.

 

The laws of evidence, however, are issues for the individual jurisdiction. It gets a little complicated, but generally speaking it would be Unconstitutional for the Federal government to proscribe the laws of evidence for the several States.

 

3. Mind Control while in some ways analogous to rape would have to be legislated as a specific offense. You'd also have to figure out a reliable means of forensically determining mind control, which would be a bear.

[Heroic Halfwit]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Legal question and scenario idea no 2 and this harkens back to secret identity.

 

The Feral Kat is an outlaw whose fingerprints and other DNA are held on record. She is charismatic and makes good copy for the papers and television. Her name however is Jane Doe as nothing of her background has been pinpointed to date.

Electric Justice is a killer vigilante who has hunted down and killed 'those who break the law'. It is rumoured that some law enforcement officials are helping him and others turn a blind eye to his activities even though he is committing what amounts to murder. During his last little outing he killed a family who it was claimed were associates and confederates of the criminal Black Crow. The Crow got away. The family were Mexican immigrants. Electric Justice shows no compassion for the killing saying that collateral damage is unavoidable and that those who harbour, foster and associate with criminals cannot expect the same treatment as law abiding citizens. The police have condemned his actions and various supers have vowed to bring him in.

Feral Kat has heard that Electric Justice is targetting her and so brings up this legal quandry. She goes to court seeking to prevent any identity she uses being accessed under the Freedom of Information Act. Her point is that if it falls into the wrong hands (ie Electric Justice), he is likely to kill others in an effort to get to her. The ends cannot justify the means. Also if a mistake is made with the name say Joan Smith, Electric Justice may well wipe out one or more innocent families just to get to her. Feral Kat makes the point that she is aware that the law would be wide ranging and affect newspapers etc. While an identity is still not public knowledge, it should be illegal for someone to pass on a potential name to an interested third party ie the FBI and police have a right to that information but the Washington Times does not while it is unconfirmed. Similarly law enforcement officials including office staff should be prosecuted for passing on the 'potential' name to a killer vigilante or in the case of a hero to their arch-enemy ie Viper.

 

I realise that there may be two legal points here and there are the issues of Freedom of the Press to consider. That being said can criminals be protected against the Freedom of Information Act ?

 

Feral Kat

 

The idea is that a criminal sues the government to injoin it from releasing Personally Identifiable Information about that criminal under the Freedom of Information Act?

 

It's highly unlikely to be succesful in a practical sense. The vigilante is most likely going to get the information under the table through a contact rather than a filed FOI request. After all, the vigilante couldn't get it under their alias. The government can refuse to provide Personally Identifiable Information from a FOI request to private citizens like the vigilante. So, assuming that the outlaw can get into court and have the case heard, he/she has a good argument for that relief.

 

As to the Freedom of Press issue, Feral Kat is out of luck. It's almost impossible to prevent the publication of true information. The only way that comes to mind for Feral Kat to protect against publication that comes to mind is to enter into a binding contract with each and every news outlet. Then Feral Kat could sue on the contract, and would likely be able to get a preliminary injunction on the facts provided. i.e. Feral Kat can prove that he/she is likely to win at trial, the injury sustained is something for which money is not an adequate remedy.

[GoldenAge]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

What a fun thread!!!

 

I LOVE the HERO Forums!!!

[Naanomi]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

One aspect of law, which I have discussed before on this forum, is the potential interaction between disability law and super-law...

 

Dr. Goldman, as a side effect of his powers, must consume about 1/4 pound of gold each day to survive. Despite the name, he isn't a real doctor, and can't afford this ongoing expense. Can he apply for federal ADA funds to support his 'special dietary requirements'?

 

Can ADA building funds be used for various super-construction projects? Will they pay for the modification of Gigantoman's house into a giant sized house? Are there funds available for telepathic shielding on Mr. Mind's house, so he can get a good night's sleep?

 

Being permanently invisible has made Miss Ghost unable to hold a regular job, and thus eligible for SS disability income, right?

 

Most interesting to me is this same idea taken to educational disability law... fireproof that classroom so my son, Infernoboy, can go to class safely or you are in violation of section 504 of the ADA? While we are at it, my son's uncontrolled telekinesis is the district's responsibility to get under control, under IDEA.

 

How about TAG laws? Is the district required to support the development of my daughter's uniquely talented magical abilities? Regional should pay for a Master Magician to tutor her, again under IDEA TAG laws...

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

One aspect of law, which I have discussed before on this forum, is the potential interaction between disability law and super-law...

 

Dr. Goldman, as a side effect of his powers, must consume about 1/4 pound of gold each day to survive. Despite the name, he isn't a real doctor, and can't afford this ongoing expense. Can he apply for federal ADA funds to support his 'special dietary requirements'?

 

No. Mostly because no such funds exist.

 

Can ADA building funds be used for various super-construction projects? Will they pay for the modification of Gigantoman's house into a giant sized house? Are there funds available for telepathic shielding on Mr. Mind's house, so he can get a good night's sleep?

 

He could apply for tax credits.

 

Most interesting to me is this same idea taken to educational disability law... fireproof that classroom so my son, Infernoboy, can go to class safely or you are in violation of section 504 of the ADA? While we are at it, my son's uncontrolled telekinesis is the district's responsibility to get under control, under IDEA.

 

While IDEA is a funded program, if they can't do it, they can't do it.

 

 

How about TAG laws? Is the district required to support the development of my daughter's uniquely talented magical abilities? Regional should pay for a Master Magician to tutor her, again under IDEA TAG laws...

 

Magic aptitude is not plausibly a disability.

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

3. Mind Control while in some ways analogous to rape would have to be legislated as a specific offense. You'd also have to figure out a reliable means of forensically determining mind control, which would be a bear.

 

It could probably be adjudicated as an assault.

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Case no 3 relates to the vexed question of double jeopardy and whether it exists for your legal setup.

 

Mr Justice is accused of murder and brought before the courts, a Grand Jury deciding that there was enough evidence to warrent a trial. The evidence is circumstantial and neither the Prosecution nor the Defence have a particularly strong case. On the basis of this Mr Justice he is acquitted. The police look at the case again. some time later they arrest Roderick James. Again the evidence is circumstantial. Lo and behold the Newspapers pull a real coup in outing Roderick James as Mr Justice, a fact he reluctantly confirms. Now here is the thing. Can he be tried for the same murder that his alter ego wa acquitted of due to Double Jeopardy ?

 

He can't be tried twice for the same murder. Note that this is different from the situation where he kills someone, is convicted of the crime, that person is brought back to life after he serves his term and then he kills his victim again. In such a case while the first murder conviction would be voided by the person being alive, the second murder would be a separate offence. Mr. Justice could not argue that he had already "paid in advance".

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

 

In the light of what people do know who the Supreme Court say is Jane 'Femmebot' Doe's owner ? assume for sake of clarity the Justices as a whole are not swayed by Megacorp's efforts and do not hold it against them.

 

Under no circumstances after the passage of the 14th amendment would a person physically indistinguishable from a human be ruled to be a nonperson. The primary question for the Supreme Court to decide is "when and where was Jane Doe born?" Was it the date of the original assembly of the robot, or the moment it was somehow used to create a human being? If it is ruled that she was "born" inside the United States, INS has no case. Note that she will almost certainly be classed as a minor until her 18th birthday even though she was created in the semblance of an adult. However she could apply to be an emancipated minor if she's able to take care of herself.

[Naanomi]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

No. Mostly because no such funds exist.

ADA does offer supplementary funds and support services for people with disability-limited diets, generally very restricted allergen diets. My son has been eligable for such a program in the past. While it isn't a golden diet, it *has* been expensive fish protein.

 

 

While IDEA is a funded program' date=' if they can't do it, they can't do it. [/quote']

If they can't (and, in most states, that means 'our school will be bankrupted if we do this'), the school is still responsible for providing a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), usually in the form of supported home tutoring.

 

 

Magic aptitude is not plausibly a disability.

It would be possible to be 'talented' in this area, and thus under IDEA's 'talented and gifted' provision might have special consideration. Particularly at the highschool level, the district often is responsible for funding tutoring or sending kids to college courses during school hours.

[death tribble]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

I'll ask Steve Long about the Vampire issue and try and quote from the Stronghold book to make it clearer.

 

On the Feral Kat issue, if someone leaks a name to the media and someone else acts on that information and kills, is the leaker or the media culpable under the law ?

Feral Kat's problem is not that she might be killed if her name leaks but that if a mistake is made with the identity that innocents would be killed instead.

Thanks for the double jeopardy information and the clarification on Jane Doe's ownership. I thought the 'slavery' question might be a hand grenade but I wanted to ask and be sure if that applied.

[Yansuf]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

On the Feral Kat issue' date=' if someone leaks a name to the media and someone else acts on that information and kills, is the leaker or the media culpable under the law ? [/quote']

 

Under current law, the media cannot be prosecuted for anything in the case above. While they could be sued in civil court, highly unlikely any suit would get anywhere, even if Feral Cat is not ruled a "public figure." Freedom of the press is close to total (not quite total, but close) in the US.

The leaker might be culpable, but I cannot recall any case where a leaker was prosecuted. Worst case is they could be fired, if they are identified. Of course, it is very rare for a leaker to be identified.

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

I'll ask Steve Long about the Vampire issue and try and quote from the Stronghold book to make it clearer.

 

On the Feral Kat issue, if someone leaks a name to the media and someone else acts on that information and kills, is the leaker or the media culpable under the law ?.

 

The leaker could be sued but the media have no obligation to keep things secret. Freedom of the press applies to them.

[death tribble]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

So if the press leak a name and said person and innocents get killed as a result and it turns out the name is wrong, they cannot be held culpable ?

Hypothetical. The press leak a name and as above people die but the Press knows the name is wrong. What then ?

[death tribble]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Back to Case no 1, Vampires.

 

The Stronghold book (p29) states that and I quote "mental control of another person is a violation of that person's Thirteenth Amendment rights, and the controller is liable for an infringement of those rights. So that is the mental power of a vampire over another addressed.

P30 deals with rights of non-humans. The judgement from the Supreme Court (in the Champions Universe) was that the Fourteenth amendment protects persons ie humans. Aliens, extra dimensional life forms, artificial intelligence and the undead are not human and thus have no rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Mutants, mutates, clones and genetic constructs from human stock qualify as human. I have paraphrased what was written.

Congress as a result passes an Android, Artificial Intelligence and Alien Life Form act which gives rights to those beings but not the Undead.

 

Vampires pose a particular problem in being able to pass for human and being fully aware (in most cases) of the difference between right and wrong. In which case can a Vampire through their legal representatives stop someone from destroying them out of hand on the grounds that they are a Vampire and have no protection under the 14th Amendment.

[death tribble]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Onto case no 2 The Stronghold book states that the 'right to maintain a secret identity' is non-existant at least for criminal purposes. But the point of the case is what redress is there if the identity is made public by another party and innocents suffer as a result.

[Yansuf]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

So if the press leak a name and said person and innocents get killed as a result and it turns out the name is wrong, they cannot be held culpable ?

 

Hypothetical. The press leak a name and as above people die but the Press knows the name is wrong. What then ?

 

If it can be proven that they knew it was wrong, they will lose the civil suit for wrongful death. Hard to prove though.

While I would love for a newspaper or TV station (and their reporter(s)) to be prosecuted in the case above, there is no precedent for it that I am aware of. The DA could try to make a case for "reckless disregard" stick, but as I said there is no precedent.

Of course, if it could be proven that the paper/reporter not only knew the info was false, but meant for someone to be hurt, they could probably be prosecuted. Again, hard to prove.

[death tribble]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Case No 5. A hero kills someone. However it can be proved hewas elsewhere at the time of the killing. Investigation turns up that it was the hero but from a time in the future.

Can the hero currently be tried for the murder/manslaughter he will commit or would there be a fear that attempting due process would lead him into committing the crime.

Ignore the temporal paradox and attempted saving of the person by time travel.

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

So if the press leak a name and said person and innocents get killed as a result and it turns out the name is wrong, they cannot be held culpable ?

 

Hypothetical. The press leak a name and as above people die but the Press knows the name is wrong. What then ?

 

Truth is a defense against libel suits in American courts. If they get the facts wrong however, they can be sued on that basis.

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Back to Case no 1, Vampires.

 

The Stronghold book (p29) states that and I quote "mental control of another person is a violation of that person's Thirteenth Amendment rights, and the controller is liable for an infringement of those rights. So that is the mental power of a vampire over another addressed.

P30 deals with rights of non-humans. The judgement from the Supreme Court (in the Champions Universe) was that the Fourteenth amendment protects persons ie humans. Aliens, extra dimensional life forms, artificial intelligence and the undead are not human and thus have no rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Mutants, mutates, clones and genetic constructs from human stock qualify as human. I have paraphrased what was written.

Congress as a result passes an Android, Artificial Intelligence and Alien Life Form act which gives rights to those beings but not the Undead.

 

Vampires pose a particular problem in being able to pass for human and being fully aware (in most cases) of the difference between right and wrong. In which case can a Vampire through their legal representatives stop someone from destroying them out of hand on the grounds that they are a Vampire and have no protection under the 14th Amendment.

 

No. The supreme court decision denied them due process under the law.

[Yansuf]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Case No 5.

 

A hero kills someone. However it can be proved hewas elsewhere at the time of the killing. Investigation turns up that it was the hero but from a time in the future. Can the hero currently be tried for the murder/manslaughter he will commit or would there be a fear that attempting due process would lead him into committing the crime.

Ignore the temporal paradox and attempted saving of the person by time travel.

 

WOW!

This one would probably be in the courts for decades.

General rule of US law: you cannot be punished for the acts of someone else, unless you have some control over the person who did it.

The lawyers would love this one!

[Clonus]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Case No 5.

 

A hero kills someone. However it can be proved hewas elsewhere at the time of the killing. Investigation turns up that it was the hero but from a time in the future. Can the hero currently be tried for the murder/manslaughter he will commit or would there be a fear that attempting due process would lead him into committing the crime.

Ignore the temporal paradox and attempted saving of the person by time travel.

 

Pre-emptive law enforcement would require new laws to be passed. The hero is not yet guilty of a crime and may never be given the timey wimey implications.

[Heroic Halfwit]

Re: Calling all lawyers--Supers and unique legal issues

 

Case No 5.

 

A hero kills someone. However it can be proved hewas elsewhere at the time of the killing. Investigation turns up that it was the hero but from a time in the future. Can the hero currently be tried for the murder/manslaughter he will commit or would there be a fear that attempting due process would lead him into committing the crime.

Ignore the temporal paradox and attempted saving of the person by time travel.

 

There is no temporal paradox, any entity "from the future" coming "back to the past" to create consequences in that "past" would by definition be an extra-dimensional invading entity. The resemblance of any such entity to any "current" entity is merely coincidental. Time is not linear, but dimensional. Entities are defined by their placement along a space/time continuum, by asserting that the entity committing the crime arrived from a different space/time you have conclusively demonstrated the uniqueness and separateness of said entity from any "present" entity.