A Divided SCOTUS?

[longknife]

What happened to carefully thought out unbiased deliberation about interpretation of the US Constitution?

Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Justice Sonia Sotomayor Attacks John Roberts as Racist!

Well, not exactly, but she might as well have.

Sotomayor attacked his his legal positions on civil rights, riffing on his famous quote from 2007's Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

At TPM, "Sotomayor Attacks John Roberts' Views On Race As 'Out of Touch With Reality'." Sotomayor Attacks John Roberts' Views On Race As 'Out Of Touch With Reality'

Now, I'm not a historian of the court but, in my 70 plus years, I've never heard of one member of the court taking on another in this way. Has it become irreparably politicized? Cam we afford to have another Sotomayer appointed to the highest bench of our land?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

She's right but not just about race.

Have we ever had a more corrupt SCOTUS?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

She's right but not just about race.

Have we ever had a more corrupt SCOTUS?

You are amazingly stupid.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

She's right but not just about race.

Have we ever had a more corrupt SCOTUS?

You are amazingly stupid.

You're answer is amazingly stupid because you don't have anything else.

Grow up twerp. Come back when you grow a pair and can actually address the issue.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear Longknife: I talked this race issue out with a friend who defines racism based on the white system in power as the default, and everyone and everything else is subject to it
and reacting to that.

Where we AGREED is that the system of ownership of land, laws and systems of politics and economics was built on generations of "white land owners" who then passed their experiences and businesses down.

And the other minorities/classes are behind on that learning curve.

Some people are from families who never owned their own houses,
much less land, businesses or whole government and financial enterprises
as the Federal Reserve investors, the Kennedy's and Koch's, etc.

So this disparity in experience are why we are not equal in authority and standing
socially, politically economically etc. This disparity is portrayed by race because that
is visible and we can group people by "socioeconomic class" by race and nationality.

So LK the solutions my friend and I agreed on is setting up
model districts or campus systems for training people on site how to manage
their own business and community administrations
so WE CAN all catch up on the LEARNING CURVE as these other people
we see in politics, media, govt, business who have generations of this experience.

They already went through their ups and downs, and know legally how to write off
their losses and expenses.

Average ppl just starting out have no idea how to do those same things.

So LK if you look at people coming from an "empowerment/experienced"
background, versus people with no such knowledge or access to how to get trained
to manage at the same level

THAT is what is meant by disparity and discrimination by race or class.

LK as long as the people in govt are not as affected by their rulings and laws,
as the people struggling in society, we are not on the same page or level.

and it is going to come out as unequal representation blamed on race or class.
that is why the convenient symbolism is being used for
the "poor blacks/minorities" and the "rich whites".

Instead of complaining or blaming, how can we set up programs for training
whole communities with onsite, handson experience to manage responsibility
for their own businesses, services, governments, cities and states.

If we keep these things "off limits" and "out of reach" by this convoluted
political system fraught with corporate connections and financial conflicts of interest,
people are going to scream "racism" and the President will continue abusing
executive authority trying to bypass the unequal unaccessible hierarchy.

that is not the solution either, we know this.

how can we work together to set up an educational "track" for moving up
where people are encouraged and rewarded, not punished and blamed.
yes people are at different levels, how do we accommodate that
without blaming either the richer or the poorer class levels?

here are the plans the community leaders in my Congressional district
wrote up into federal laws and subgrant agreements to reform public housing as
a campus system to train interns and families how to break out of the cycle of poverty and overreliance on govt welfare:
http://www.houstonprogressive.org/campus94.html
this is the model I wanted to propose to Obama and other African American church and state leaders
to end this disparity and party division between rich and poor, liberal and conservative, that is especially cripping the Black community and wasting
resources we could be investing in restoring and developing sustainable communities to end the cycles of poverty, crime, welfare

What happened to carefully thought out unbiased deliberation about interpretation of the US Constitution?

Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Justice Sonia Sotomayor Attacks John Roberts as Racist!

Well, not exactly, but she might as well have.

Sotomayor attacked his his legal positions on civil rights, riffing on his famous quote from 2007's Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

At TPM, "Sotomayor Attacks John Roberts' Views On Race As 'Out of Touch With Reality'." Sotomayor Attacks John Roberts' Views On Race As 'Out Of Touch With Reality'

Now, I'm not a historian of the court but, in my 70 plus years, I've never heard of one member of the court taking on another in this way. Has it become irreparably politicized? Cam we afford to have another Sotomayer appointed to the highest bench of our land?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What happened to carefully thought out unbiased deliberation about interpretation of the US Constitution?

It’s being practiced by Justice Sotomayor, as her opinion is consistent with existing case law.

On the Supreme Court we have liberals who are ‘conservative’ in their opinions which comport with decades of Constitutional jurisprudence, and ‘conservatives’ who seek to tear down the Constitutional edifice.

Now, I'm not a historian of the court but, in my 70 plus years, I've never heard of one member of the court taking on another in this way. Has it become irreparably politicized? Cam we afford to have another Sotomayer appointed to the highest bench of our land?

We can’t afford not to, she represents the wisdom of the Warren Court, the case law that safeguards our civil liberties, protects citizens from government excess, and allows all Americans their comprehensive civil rights.

And yes, you’re clearly no historian of the Court, as the ignorance reflected in your post would indicate. See, for example, Justice Thomas’ concurring opinion in McDonald.

 

[DGS49]

"...the wisdom of the Warren Court."

Really?

The "Warren Court" tried to re-write the Constitution according to its own progressive/liberal biases, and succeeded beyond anyone's rational expectations. Their bizarre readings of cases, laws, and the Constitution itself freed hundreds of thousands of guilty felons, virtually eliminated the death penalty for years on end, rendered defamation laws almost meaningless as respects "public figures," freed pornographers from any tangible restraints, created out of thin air a "wall of separation between Church & State," overturned thousands of years of social mores by sanctioning abortion, facilitated intentional racial discrimination by the State ("affirmative action"), and gave federal judges the ability to reek havoc on school districts around the country based on nothing more than their own out-of-touch proclivities.

Beware of anyone who demands that you IGNORE THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF when ascertaining the state of "Constitutional Law." Not surprisingly, this is what Liberals do constantly in discussions about ConLaw. "Don't bother with that old document, pay attention to PRECEDENTS!"

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!