FIRST TRUMP CHANGES THE NAME OF THE GULF OF MEXICO, AND NOW THEY WANT TO CHANGE THE NAME OF BOCA CHICA TO CYBER BEACH

UPDATE:

Erin Gamez announces Boda Chica will remain Boca Chica.  So, we won.

The unanswered question is, how did this happen, and where was the city and county openly opposing this. We need answers.

You know why these abuses happen?  Because our elected officials fail us at every turn.  They want to rob us of our heritage.

While Gamez's notice to her constituents may be helpful, it may be too late.

They renamed Fronton St. to an Anglo name.  Fronton in Spanish means bluff.  It was named over the bluff overlooking the Rio Grande before it was dammed. 

We need to find out who knew about this and when at the city and county.  There has to be accountability.

Where was the city and county keeping us informed and opposing this?

 

YOU HAVE TO PARSE THINGS OUT MANY TIMES BEFORE THE PICTURE IS CLEAR

I am nearly done with my latest mandamus against Omar Ochoa.  The state needs to remove Omar Ochoa from his position.  I think I am getting close on that issue.

On the Pablo Kisel bars, some documents have now been uploaded to the District Clerk's web page, but not all.  I still have not seen the notices posted on the doors of the bar.

But in parsing this out over and over again and outlining what I know something has become clear.

BUT FIRST:  The city of Brownsville's objection to judge Robert Garza is online.  As a matter or right everyone gets one objection to a visiting judge, without a stated cause.  The state exercised this right and stated no reason for its objection to Judge Garza. This is perfectly permissible.  Speculation is reckless and should be dismissed by any rational reader.

Social media going down the rabbit's hole speculating as to the basis for the objection is just trash journalism.  I read the objection and it a clean objection of right.  There is no stated reason because one is not needed. 

I really want to see the notices posted on the bar doors, but the key may be elsewhere.

I BEGIN WITH THE CITY'S CLAIMS AND TAKE THEM AS TRUE

The bars were serving minors, while other patrons were using cocaine.  The bars only have control of serving minors.  On the cocaine issue, if an inspector sees someone using cocaine and a bar staffer is there and sees it also, then the bar can be warned.  But key is, if the inspector actually saw someone using cocaine, the user should have been arrested. But this is not on the bar owner unless it can be proven bar staff see the user's using cocaine.

Serving minors:  If an inspector saw a minor being served, then a citation should have been issued.  The minor should have been arrested.  If these things did not happen then the problem is with the city inspectors and not the bar owners.

I get bored with parents who are like, "I cannot control my child because I am a horrible parent so punish the bar owners."  If your 18-year-old son is in a bar, especially with a fake ID, then you as the parent are the problem.  It is not for the bar owners to do your job as a parent.  

Bar fights: unless you can prove a bartender overserved a patron and then that patron got into a fight, the bar is not responsible. 

Parents need to take responsibility for the acts of their children. 

The Brownsville Police Department and Saenz are a big part of the problem. I appreciate Adult Probation warns their defendants to stay away from Pablo Kisel.  The facts justify the warning.

Cities with formal Red-Light Districts, have additional police on patrol during key hours.  There must be zero tolerance for fights in or around the bars.  

The DA must set a minimum bail and eventual fine for fighting in and around bars, or public intoxication.  We all know Saenz will never do that. We also know the city will never research how other cities handle a Red-Light District.

I am not saying the situation near Pablo Kisel is acceptable.  I am saying parents need to control their kids.  I am saying if you are arrested having a fight in or around the bars, there should be a higher bond to get out of jail, and a mandatory fine and probation which is higher than just getting in a fight elsewhere.  Bars are unique and additional punishment is needed.

It took me a while to get to a conclusion, but because I have to parse the problem out it takes time.

My best computer remains my pad and pencil. 

 

BROWNSVILLE MISSES OPPORTUNITY TO PROFILE SPORTS PARK, PROMOTE BROWNSVILLE, AND BRING THE CITY TOGETHER

It has been a long dream of many in Brownsville to make the Sports Park as place for statewide soccer tournaments. 

The Mexico game should have been an opportunity to profile Brownsville's Sports Park.  Mexicans who can would have come across the border and stayed at least one night in our hotels.  They would have eaten here and possibly shopped.  

It is possible people from upriver also would have spent at least one night in Brownsville.

The food truck industry could have shined at the Sports Park.

The Brownsville image is simple: if the elected officials cannot make money on something, they will not think of it.

 

Thomas Jefferson Declaration of Independence

 

THE HERALD PRINTS INCOHERENT GIBBERISH ON PABLO KISEL BAR CLOSINGS

The Trial by Franz Kafka is all anyone needs to read to understand Due Process.  It is short.  It is basically the journey of a clerk through the legal system, without ever being told what he did wrong.  How do the bar owners appeal the closing of their bars without specific notice of what they did wrong?

Now I have desperately tried to get access to the notices to see if they comply with due process.  No one seems to want to post the notices in a readable form. 

It appears, but I will not claim, the notices the city put on bar doors does not specifically state which codes were violated and when.  If this is true, then the city will be liable for damages.

But I will not call it.  I need to be able to see the notices to form an opinion.

The Herald certainly has the technology to post a link to the notices but chose not to.  They certainly have the ability to report on the claims in the lawsuit, and TRO.  The Herald chose not to.

I have contacted several bar owners for information concerning the lawsuit and TRO.  One messaged me and asked why I am suing the city.  I told him in the message I sent him. That is going nowhere. 

There appears to be a very clear Due Process problem, but I will not call it without the documents.  This is why so many people rely on the BV2.  They know I will hold on a story until I see the key documents. 

 

CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLARS STRUGGLING TO READ THE BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP DECISION

On the issue of whether the 14th Amendment bars Trump from enforcing his EO on birthright citizenship the vote was 5/4.  Four Justices voted Trump's EO DOES NOT VIOLATE the 14th Amendment.

Enforcement of Trump's EO fell short by one vote.  If any of the 5 who voted Trump's EO violated the 14th Amendment were to die during the next 2 1/2 years Trump could appoint the 5th vote.

This is what I reported as key to the story.  The 5/4 is dangerous.

The mainstream media got it all wrong, because they cannot read a simple opinion.

This is a good summary of how the decision is being read as 6/3, based on statutory language and not the 14th Amendment.

"More importantly for the future, while three justices outright dissented, a fourth (Brett Kavanaugh), joined dissenters in finding no 14th Amendment violation. (Kavanaugh signed onto the majority decision blocking Trump's executive order but based his view on a violation of immigration statutes dating to 1940 and 1952.)"

Kavanaugh was desperate to send a message with one more Justice appointed by Trump birthright citizenship can come to an end.

Late last night analyst finally started to report what really happened.

 

DID TRUMP'S EMERGENCY DOCKET DENY JUSTICE TO AVERAGE JOES

The news media seems challenged on deciding how many people had their case denied by the Supreme Court during the 2025-2026 Term.

You can click here to see the order's list which has case numbers assigned when filed during the Term.  You decide.

This Term, it is not disputed, the Court only issued 68 opinions.  This is shameful. Click here to see history of opinions by year.

Before any modern technology the Court easily issued 200 plus opinions and once over 300.  The Court is clearly not upholding its oath of office.

Was the Court just so busy approving Trump's agenda to get to the average Joe's case?

BUT A REAL CASE WHICH REOPENS JOHN DOE'S CASE AGAINST LUIS SAENZ AND GABBY GARCIA

Today the Supreme Court remanded a lot of cases filed by inmates claiming their Plea Bargain is unenforceable. 

The Supreme Court held that an appeal waiver in a plea agreement is unenforceable if enforcing it would result in a miscarriage of justice.

"We principally hold that an agreement not to appeal a sentence is unenforceable when it would result in a miscarriage of justice—meaning, when it would leave in place the kind of egregious error that would bring the judicial system into disrepute."

See Hunter v. US

Do not forget, John Doe was forced to sign a plea bargain under oath stating he had no history or mental illness, while the motion to find him mentally incompetent was pending before the court.