should KBJ be removed from SCOTUS for this blatant deviation from the constitution??

[justoffal]

in her dissenting opinion in the affirmative action case she openly dismisses the constitution and states ideology should be the deciding factor in US law.

in my opinion she should resign or be removed.

what say you??


She argued that affirmative action programs are legal and necessary to atone for generational discrimination against black people in America, sins that have never been fully rectified.

"The only way out of this morass—for all of us—is to stare at racial disparity unblinkingly, and then do what evidence and experts tell us is required to level the playing field and march forward together,

Clarence Thomas demolishes Justice Jackson's defense of race-based admissions with blistering response: 'Race-infused world view falls flat at each step' | Blaze Media

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a blistering opinion supporting the high court's ruling against affirmative action programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.In particular, Thomas extensively rebuffed Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissent.What did Justice Jackson argue?Though she...

www.theblaze.com

Yeah.... If she doesn't respect the constitution she doesn't belong there

Jo

 

[pknopp]

you made a general claim absent of any facts r proof,,, ie attack,,,

That Thomas has been on losing end of 8-1 rulings?

Clarence Thomas Sole Dissenter as SCOTUS Allows Trump's Docs to Be Seen

SCOTUS Rules 8-1 to Overturn Conviction of Child Killer, Only Justice Thomas Dissents

what did those other two say why they went that way??

6-3.

 

[progressive hunter]

That Thomas has been on losing end of 8-1 rulings?

Clarence Thomas Sole Dissenter as SCOTUS Allows Trump's Docs to Be Seen

SCOTUS Rules 8-1 to Overturn Conviction of Child Killer, Only Justice Thomas Dissents



6-3.

save me some reading and do what I did and show what he said was based on ideology and not the constitution???

 

[pknopp]

save me some reading and do what I did and show what he said was based on ideology and not the constitution???

8 saw something as Constitutional. Thomas did not.

6 saw something that 3 others did not.

It's why we have 9.

 

[progressive hunter]

8 saw something as Constitutional. Thomas did not.

6 saw something that 3 others did not.

It's why we have 9.

that doesnt mean he was going off of racist ideology or any ideology,,,

in my OP I showed her own words where she admits its about her racist ideology not the equal rights under the law stated in the constitution,,,

 

[justoffal]

8 saw something as Constitutional. Thomas did not.

6 saw something that 3 others did not.

It's why we have 9.

By and large the dissenters
seem to be flagrently disregarding the constitution.
Perhaps they could try to make a case?

 

[pknopp]

that doesnt mean he was going off of racist ideology or any ideology,,,

in my OP I showed her own words where she admits its about her racist ideology not the equal rights under the law stated in the constitution,,,

The Constitution can be taken from more than one position. It's the justices job to decide which is over another.

As I noted in last year's abortion ruling. I could understand a justice siding both ways.

1. It says nothing about abortion.

2. Abortion falls under right to privacy.

 

[pknopp]

By and large the dissenters
seem to be flagrently disregarding the constitution.
Perhaps they could try to make a case?

One can make that case with any side of the losing argument.

 

[LeroyDumonde]

of course you can provide a link to prove yourself right,,

but youre still a racist,,

http://tankona.free.fr/rushtonjensen06.pdf

 

[struth]

in her dissenting opinion in the affirmative action case she openly dismisses the constitution and states ideology should be the deciding factor in US law.

in my opinion she should resign or be removed.

what say you??


She argued that affirmative action programs are legal and necessary to atone for generational discrimination against black people in America, sins that have never been fully rectified.

"The only way out of this morass—for all of us—is to stare at racial disparity unblinkingly, and then do what evidence and experts tell us is required to level the playing field and march forward together,

Clarence Thomas demolishes Justice Jackson's defense of race-based admissions with blistering response: 'Race-infused world view falls flat at each step' | Blaze Media

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a blistering opinion supporting the high court's ruling against affirmative action programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.In particular, Thomas extensively rebuffed Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissent.What did Justice Jackson argue?Though she...

www.theblaze.com

she should be removed cause she doesn’t know what a woman is…how in the world can we expect her to understand the Constitution?

 

[progressive hunter]

The Constitution can be taken from more than one position. It's the justices job to decide which is over another.

As I noted in last year's abortion ruling. I could understand a justice siding both ways.

1. It says nothing about abortion.

2. Abortion falls under right to privacy.

it does say right to life,, it doesnt say outside the womb life,,

no abortion doesnt have to do with privacy,, if it did all I have to do is kill you in private,,,

now stop dodging and show me thomas's words where he went off of racist ideology??

 

[progressive hunter]

One can make that case with any side of the losing argument.

not when the person admits they are going off of racist ideology that goes directly against equal protection under the law stated in the constitution,,

 

[justoffal]

it does say right to life,, it doesnt say outside the womb life,,

no abortion doesnt have to do with privacy,, if it did all I have to do is kill you in private,,,

now stop dodging and show me thomas's words where he went off of racist ideology??

They can't.... They've gotten into the bad habit of using racism for anything that disagrees with them. It's a mentally lazy reflex. Hell you have four black cops beating a black perp to death and they blame it on white supremacy. How do you expect to have any type of intelligent conversation with them?

 

[progressive hunter]

They can't.... They've gotten into the bad habit of using racism for anything that disagrees with them. It's a mentally lazy reflex. Hell you have four black cops beating a black perp to death and they blame it on white supremacy. How do you expect to have any type of intelligent conversation with them?

youre right,,
but it is fun watching them squirm trying to avoid proving their case,,,

 

[justoffal]

youre right,,
but it is fun watching them squirm trying to avoid proving their case,,,

You know as well as I do that this issue is far from over.
The admissions folks are simply going to do their work in dark. The one thing that had changed however is the ability to challenge.

 

[dblack]

You know as well as I do that this issue is far from over.
The admissions folks are simply going to do their work in dark. The one thing that had changed however is the ability to challenge.

How did that change? It just flipped the table. Now whites can sue them instead of blacks. It's just fucked up in the other direction. That's all Trumpsters are capable of.

 

[progressive hunter]

You know as well as I do that this issue is far from over.
The admissions folks are simply going to do their work in dark. The one thing that had changed however is the ability to challenge.

I just saw a memo from harvard where they say the admissions essay will be required to be about how your race has effected your life,, after that it will be easy for them to continue their racist admissions program,,

 

[progressive hunter]

8 saw something as Constitutional. Thomas did not.

6 saw something that 3 others did not.

It's why we have 9.

 

[justoffal]

I just saw a memo from harvard where they say the admissions essay will be required to be about how your race has effected your life,, after that it will be easy for them to continue their racist admissions program,,

Yes there will be many challenges and court cases.

Jo

 

[The Duke]

in her dissenting opinion in the affirmative action case she openly dismisses the constitution and states ideology should be the deciding factor in US law.

in my opinion she should resign or be removed.

what say you??


She argued that affirmative action programs are legal and necessary to atone for generational discrimination against black people in America, sins that have never been fully rectified.

"The only way out of this morass—for all of us—is to stare at racial disparity unblinkingly, and then do what evidence and experts tell us is required to level the playing field and march forward together,

Clarence Thomas demolishes Justice Jackson's defense of race-based admissions with blistering response: 'Race-infused world view falls flat at each step' | Blaze Media

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a blistering opinion supporting the high court's ruling against affirmative action programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina.In particular, Thomas extensively rebuffed Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's dissent.What did Justice Jackson argue?Though she...

www.theblaze.com

Whoah! She does not need to be on the Supreme Court.