- This topic has 6 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
I’m told the Thomas concurrence focuses on three additional decisions for similar review.
He is one extreme re “states rights”. I am to some degree similarly inclined. We need to force legislative bodies to do their job. Enough of this kicking the can for division and political advantage. We see this playing out now with the gun control debate in the senate. Force these guys to take a position, put a stake in the ground and then face the voters. (See Cruz & Cornyn)
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long -
-
-
In the wake of this major reversal is the deterioration of the famed collegiality of the U. S. Supreme Court.
Supreme Court justices aren’t pretending to respect each other (msn.com)
For me, the elimination of the formerly cordial atmosphere has its roots in four core areas:
- The leftward drift of the court, which started decades ago, and the expectation of the Left that the USSC would be their property, essentially another legislating arm for the Left’s agenda. And Leftist nominees adhered to the Left agenda and judicial activism, whereas nominees from Republican presidents were rarely committed to the Right or to strict interpretations of the Constitution. Many of the Republican nominees turned out to be centrist moderates or liberal. As long as the Left maintained its majority, they could afford to be collegial. Everyone’s a good winner.
- Republicans started to nominate justices who were reliably conservative and the Left, when they could, Borked those candidates. Yes, I recall when Justice Robert Bork’s last name became a verb, when he was nominated by Reagan in 1987 to succeed Justice Powell. And, well…here’s Senator (and noted feminist) Ted Kennedy: “Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, [and] schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution…”
- Both sides turned to polemicists. Most of the existing court were nominees who fit the political preferences of the politicians who named them, and many — on both the left and right — were selected because of what they represented politically rather than their substantive judicial record.
- The Left is still butt-hurt from Justice Ginsberg’s colossally stupid decision to stay on the court rather than retire when President Obama could nominate a Leftist nominee. Instead, Trump got to nominate 1/3rd of the court, so much of the Left wants to pack the court.
How Robert Bork’s Failed Nomination Led to a Changed Supreme Court – HISTORY
-
Mick, do you think it was random chance that Justice Sotomayor elected to provide a character reference for Justice Thomas after the draft was leaked and before the final opinion was released? I don’t.
As a consequence, I think the opinions of the Washington Post are narrative aimed to further division with the attendant civil disobedience. The Bangles covered it well…”Walk like a Supreme Court Justice”.
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/ishapiro/status/1541491241678000128
The political question doctrine formerly left the Court out of a lot of thorny issues. Finding a constitutional right to abortion (taking advantage of the proclivities of the justices at the time) resulted in the politicization of the Court. What is interesting to me is that Breyer now joins dissents that ten years ago, he may not have joined. So be it.
Justice Thomas is bearing the brunt of the left’s attacks, but he has been the most intellectually consistent justice since joining the Court.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.