Does anyone think that Thomas would review and rule unconstitutional the Loving vs Virginia decision that overturned the Virginia law that made interracial marriage illegal. Where in the Constitution is he given the right to marry a white woman! Outrageous.
Clarence apparently has forgotten history as it applies to HIM. By his "standards," he should be back in the fields picking cotton. I don't believe "emancipation" is in the Constitution either. Or did I miss something?
I can't *wait* for the day Loving gets lumped routinely with the other relational decisions like contraceptive and same-sex marriage legality that Ginni's best friend wants to overturn!
Thomas is going to be one of the dissenters when Loving comes up. Just like he was a dissenter when his wife was in the mix around that SC January order rejecting Trump's bid to withhold documents.
I note this: “let’s take a wild guess and say Brown v. Board of Education.” Not at all a wild guess. Several weeks ago, before the SC’s ruling even became official, some right-wing operative whose name I’ve forgotten declared jubilantly to a reporter: “Next — Brown v. Board of Education!” The wraps are off now, and the right-wingers are no longer concealing their goal, which is to destroy every right women and minorities have gained in the past 150 years.
Note, however, that one of those white guys compared their decision in Dobbs (overturning Roe v. Wade) to Brown v. Board of Education (overturning Plessy v. Ferguson). That's in my list of top 5 outrages, even though it's got plenty of competition. IMO their essential goal is to destroy the federal government and return everything to the states. Women and minorities can have rights (for the time being) if we're lucky enough to live in states with Democratic/democratic governments. What they're really trying to overturn is the outcome of the Civil War.
Keep in mind a recent survey of GOP voters that revealed ONE THIRD of them wish the South had won the Civil War! That means there are millions of Americans who would love to see slavery reinstated.
Yes. I keep that in mind all the time. It is inconceivable to me personally to think that way, but I know that a healthy percentage of Trump voters, especially in the deep South, feel that way.
Yes. More proof, as if any were needed, that the Trump presidency is the backlash to the Obama presidency.
“Nonsense“ is the courteous name. Trump is an overt racist, and his birther accusation was blatantly racist without appearing to be so. The definition of a dog whistle. In time, the witness reports will come out that Trump called him a nigger. Just not in front of the cameras.
SCOTUS handed us three decisions this week, with a fourth pending for next. In addition to Roe, we will now have the scourge of being an open-carry state, and the separation of Church and State was chipped away at too. Next week we have the decisions about the Federal Government’s right to make environmental decisions. When at least 5 of the so-called Justices vote to hamstring the Federal Government, you can rest assured that they will aim their sights at Social Security, Medicare and Medicare, and OSHA, and possibly the IRS as well. The net results will be the empowering of States at the expense of Federal Legislation. Chaos awaits.
I'm trying to fantasize a country in which a majority of people believe that the permanent threat to democracy is more serious than temporary inflation. This isn't easy.
The 1st three SCROTUS decisions now allow lawful assasination, indoctrination, and impregnation, keeping us afraid, loyal and barefoot. The 4th next week will be their underlying goal - declaring natural resources for industrial raping. And my environmental engineer dad thought Neil Gorsuch was "such a nice boy."
My OCD compelling me to correct (sorry MaryPat), SCROTUS is a title of non-endearment for a President, not the SC. So Called Ruler Of The United States, I believe I first heard it in the 70s or early 80s (Trick Dicky Nixon?) but the acronym has had a resurrection since 45's election.
The strategy is very much like the recall attempt of Gavin Newsom. The Republican Party in California is nearly powerless, with a Democratic super majority in both houses of the Legislature, and with the Republicans never able anymore to win a state office. So they are desperate, and the recall is the only path to try to put a reactionary Republican back in power.
By returning power to the states, it’s the only chance for the reactionaries (sexists, racists, antisemites, genderists et al) to impose some last desperate regressive laws on society. However, equality and diversity are the wave of the future. The Borg is bearing down on them, and they will be assimilated.
Similar situation here in MA, although our sitting governor is a Republican. He's not running for a third term, and many of us suspect it's because he might have been primaried by the loonies who've taken over the state GOP. (Their latest gambit is a suit to overturn vote by mail, a temporary provision during Covid that was just made permanent by our VOTES Act.)
I hope CA's legislative Democratic supermajorities are more solidly liberal/progressive than ours A significant chunk of ours, esp. in the House, are at best shaky on "social issues," including abortion rights. We've also got arguably the least transparent state legislature in the country, and again, the House (including its leadership) is the big problem.
We now have permanent Vote by Mail here in California. We receive our ballots in the mail, along with candidates’ statements, etc. We have several options for voting. We can drop our ballot in the mail, drop it off in a secure drop box near us, vote early at a Vote Center or vote in person on Election Day. You don’t have to vote in an assigned Vote Center; you may vote at any Vote Center in the county. The downside is that it takes weeks to count all the ballots, so a winner cannot be declared on Election night.
I like it, though I wonder if a swing state could get away with taking that long to count all the ballots. TFG went ballistic in 2020 because the results weren't final on election night, and of course no one could explain to him how elections work in the real world. Can voters show up at a Vote Center without the ballot they received in the mail and get another ballot? It's not hard to imagine mislaying the ballot, spilling coffee on it, or having the dog eat it.
You vote in person, like we all used to do. You give your name (as printed on your sample ballot), address, and sign your name when you go to a Vote Center. You then vote at a computer terminal, which prints a hard copy, which is inserted into a slot on the terminal. This can be done at any Vote Center in the county. We used to have to vote at our own precinct but not anymore.
P.S. in mid-October: The 1/6 hearings, especially the 9th and most recent of them, have revealed that TFG *didn't* go ballistic "because the results weren't final on election night." This tantrum was planned well in advance. It was part of a plan to discredit the election results if it looked like he might lose.
The next case to go down is the EPA case in W VA. That case will be devastating to not just the EPA, but the whole ‘administrative state.’ It basically says that the EPA doesn’t have the authority to make the rules, for say, carbon emissions, etc, and that role is Congress. So…Congress will then be expected to explore the science, etc and then make the laws governing such science. You can see where this is going…
The new anti-Roe decision boils down to one thing:
Sexism.
Discrimination against women. The control and subjugation of women. The wet dream of every male sexist like Clarence Thomas is to be able to change society and laws to control, restrict, subjugate, and suppress women.
What is a conservative? A conservative is somebody who wants to keep the old history and traditions. Because society keeps turning against racism and sexism, they keep having to change their name. In the 1800s it was slaveowners. During the Civil War it was the Confederates. Then the KKK was formed. Then they all became part of the Southern Democrats. Then after LBJ’s Voting Rights Act, they migrated over to the Republican Party. Now they call themselves Originalists.
People who like Trump, people who like racist and sexist policy, they are never going to go away.
The backlash to the Obama presidency is continuing. The white supremacists and male supremacists, the people contemptuous of gender and racial equality, will continue to lie cheat and steal to keep society the way they want it. Racists and sexists are a minority now. We have to get our butts in gear and make sure they don’t keep running the show despite being on the decline.
I am a woman well past child bearing age, but that doesn’t mean I’m not enraged by this “Supreme” Court ruling. Taking away a woman’s right to choose when and if she has children takes away her right to live a life she chooses for herself. In my opinion, because there is no 100% effective birth control, this “Supreme” Court has relegated sexual intercourse only to those people who are intentionally trying to create a child. This is absolutely draconian.
Actually, it is absolutely Roman Catholic. It’s shoving conservative Catholic theology down everyone’s throats: the assertion that sex should be engaged in ONLY by a man and a woman who are open to conceiving a child. All others must abstain permanently from any sexual activity or relationships.
I grew up at the knee of a grandmother warning that electing a Catholic president would invite the Pope to take over the White House. Wrong! The danger was one Connecticut Yankee, one evangelical, and one self-worshiping president who would appoint RC SCotUS justices out of step with their more benevolent Pope (Justice Sotomayor being the exception who provides the norm).
Ok, you’ll have to let me have a momentary lapse. I’ve been out of California and in Washington state 4 weeks now; it’s been super disorienting. Still adjusting to having a Washington driver’s license, among many other things. If that’s my only glitch here on this forum, that’s a victory. 😘
I’m SO glad I spent much of my life studying American History and law, even if only to be able to comprehend fully the legal and practical impact of the twisted, craven decisions of this right wing (way beyond “conservative”) majority. Execrable, in crystalline form. Richard Cole. Cornell University ‘72 magna cum laude American History; Harvard Law School ‘75.
Mr. Cole. Ah, if only the unwashed masses in our body politic has your resources and educational advantages. They don't so we are now left with what happens in an illiberal democracy where, yes, a majority of those who vote can dictate to the real majority. OH, if only some of those who did not have a civics class in junior high or high school could understand the genius of our Constitution in granting liberty to all regardless of the will of the majority. Why it is almost as if Justices Thomas, Alito, Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch cut those courses when they went to law school?
Oh, I got it. Just trying to point out if it takes that kind of educational level to figure out why this ruling was unjust our nation is in deep trouble. And, yes, we are in deep trouble. Do you or do you not get that? And, just to make another point: it was a large contingent of very well paid lawyers who have for years argued to roll back civil rights and liberties. What is their excuse?
If he is such an originalist, Thomas’s vote should only count for three-fifths of a vote. So these reprehensible tallies should be listed not asc6-6, but as 5.6-3.
“3/5” never gave enslaved Blacks ANY portion of a vote, but was used to count them in census to give whites only even MORE (x1.6) representation by Congressmen in in the House.
Even my “x1.6” is not quite accurate; when enslaved Blacks were counted in the census, then multiplied by .6, that number was added to the number of white males to constitute the number to be represented in the state’s congressional (House) delegation, causing over-representation of white men (the only voters, often requiring ownership of property and/or payment of poll tax) in “slave” states.
I guess the point for these six is stripping the 14th Amendment of meaning and returning us to literally the pre-Civil War constitution, which of course included an emphasis on states' rights and no rights to privacy as developed over the years. I bet that privacy is not only important to "libs" but to conservatives and Trumpets as well, but the Trumpets seem determined to define privacy in such as way that says "only for me and not for thee." Garbage.
Yes, Jay, the Supreme Court majority wants to take us back in time to a Stone Age society that we have left behind. Welcome to the past. Welcome to the society where women were furniture. Welcome to Saudi Arabia.
Yes. I seem to recall that quite a number of Congresspersons who have an "R" beside their names also have a history of "interesting" sexual experiences, one in particular with underage girls. The loss of their "right to privacy" may land them behind bars. I guess they haven't considered that - yet. What goes around comes around and Karma is a you-know-what. And now Karma has been multiplied by many millions of angry women.
Yes, it would appear the six conservative members (OK maybe 5 1/2) of this Court are more than willing to turn back the clock but to the Dark Ages?
These decisions prove beyond a shadow of a doubt elections have consequences and that a way too large segment of our voting public, particularly in red and rural states, are perfectly OK living in the past. For what reason? Evidently , to codify their superiority and dominance over the others in our society who do not look like, think like or act like them. And, that another large segment (roughly one third) who stay home on election day because they are either "too busy" or "my vote doesn't matter) have contributed consistently to giving the right more power than its numbers would indicate.
Thomas's language in his decision is what is really chilling. He is going to push for more revisionism in the future. And while the other Federalist Society blessed judges say in their opinion that is not what they believe we must remember three of these Justices lied during their confirmation hearings about stare decisis although Barrett did clarify her position to say she believed there might be instances when precedent deserved to be overturned.
The Trump nominees are young. They will be pulling the Federalist Society wagon for a couple decades or more. The United States of the late 20th Century is dead. Welcome to the GOP version of The End Times.
I think you describe where we are and how we got here accurately. I'm not so sure about where you say we're going. I doubt the current imbalance between power and popular will can persist in a country where citizens are used to freedom as an everyday reality.
If we take this ruling and the words of Justice Thomas at face value the answer to your question is going to be “where do you live?” We have heard a lot about “Two Americas” in the past. I fear we are about to find out what that means in a large number of places. I am informed by the thinking and writings of Fareed Zaharia on what he calls “illiberal democracy.”
A divide between rural and urban exists in all cultures and surely always has. So? (I recommend @nyfarmer.) You seem to assume that this moment is frozen. The situation is not rational, nor is the backlash. It is timid only at the very top and that does not imply violence. NY is considering declaring that by virtue of population density the city qualifies as a weapons-banned zone. Women are engulfed by fury. The very idea, that a creepy stranger in Halloween costume would presume with some poorly chosen words the right to control your body and your destiny! What next? Women need guardians to drive? Burkas? The Federalist Society and, with all due respect, I daresay you and Fareed Zaharia can only observe the experience, not grasp it at gut level. That requires living it. The beginning has barely begun. The moment is dynamic.
Well, Di. As the father of two modern women and their mother who lives in the 21s not the 18th century I do not need to possess a uterus to "grasp" this problem now facing women. But, it is much broader in that when we start to chip away from the inalienable rights granted to all of us. we are already on the slippery slope to rule of the minority by a majority which is why what Fareed has advanced is such an important principle for all of us. All of our liberties are at stake not just the one most important to any one of us. In this country we live under one Constitution with inalienable rights for all. At least, supposedly.
On a totally different front, I would also simply ask you to welcome all who are supportive of your point of view even if they may not be as wise, intelligent and immediately invested in a particular issue. The reason the right is now driving so much of our political and judicial agenda is over the years it has consolidated a coalition of different forces. On the left progressives seem less capable of doing so because too many of them focus on one single issue and don't seem to realize while it may be critical to them the only strength which matters is at the ballot box. We now see hundreds of thousands marching in the streets. How many of them will actually turn out come election day to vote against the forces which have driven us to this point? That jury is still out as it always seems to be.
Yes, as you note, words. Words, words, words. Ignorant, irrational, power-obsessed. I keep hearing on the air that we're stuck with this court and these decisions for decades to come. Really? Really??? How much longer, how many decisions more, is a tolerant majority going to accept—from electoral college to stacked legislative representation and attendant filibuster—reactionary minority tyranny? The life-threatening consequences are unendurable. … How long?
Reactionary jokers will keep trying to run society as long as we let them. Bush v. Gore. The Trump presidency. Leonard Leo’s Supreme Court.
The January 6 committee is part of the solution to this problem. Also Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. The DoJ should be part of the solution, but they seem to be MIA under Garland.
Politics aside, you ever think that Gorsuch remembers that he’s sitting in Garland’s seat, that Thomas in his heart of hearts knows that he’s a scumbag, that kavanaugh understands that his appointment was a put-up job or that Barrett knows that she’s no more qualified to sit on the Court than she would be to pitch for the Yankees? They all have to know.
I think it’s clear from Thomas’s behavior and words that he is NOT fit to serve and he is in cahoots, along with his wife, with the TRAITORS that want to end this democracy. Roberts has proven that he is a dope and a wimp, and he will be remembered for his lopsided, corrupt court. We all know the three LIARS that tRump and Moscow Mitch rammed through the system. . . The problem with embracing jingoistic, right-wing nut ideology is that you end up with the scourge of humanity controlling government. Well, WTF were all these “outraged” voters starting with the Reagan era? Charles KKKoch managed this power steal, learning from Nixon’s “mistakes.” Well, now we are staring Fascist Nazis down the throat.
Excellent description. Leonard Leo is the architect of this Roman Catholic SC. The Trump appointees all look like complete incompetents to me. Roberts is definitely a dope and a wimp. You have to wonder how this guy gets a coherent sentence out, he looks like a mentally deficient sap.
I spent the day yesterday vacillating between anger and disbelief. I remember watching the Anita Hill hearings when I was 25 years old. I felt in my gut that he was GUILTY of everything she was testifying to and more. There’s always more whenever you find the kind of despicable behavior that Clarence Thomas was being accused of.
Robert Reich wrote yesterday about being in law school with Clarence, and Hilary and Bill Clinton:
“In those classroom discussions almost fifty years ago, Hillary’s hand was always first in the air. When she was called upon, she gave perfect answers – whole paragraphs, precisely phrased. She distinguished one case from another, using precedents and stare decisis to guide her thinking. I was awed.
My hand was in the air about half the time, and when called on, my answers were meh.
Clarence’s hand was never in the air. I don’t recall him saying anything, ever.
Bill was never in class.”
Voting matters. I am disgusted and sad. My hope is that these events anger enough people to motivate them to go out and vote in the midterms so we can get a Democratic majority, a real majority, in senate and the house.
No, it can’t. It has to end. The backlash to the Obama presidency, in the form of Trump and the January 6 Conspiracy and a Supreme Court exhumed from the Confederacy: it has to end.
Does anyone think that Thomas would review and rule unconstitutional the Loving vs Virginia decision that overturned the Virginia law that made interracial marriage illegal. Where in the Constitution is he given the right to marry a white woman! Outrageous.
Clarence apparently has forgotten history as it applies to HIM. By his "standards," he should be back in the fields picking cotton. I don't believe "emancipation" is in the Constitution either. Or did I miss something?
You got it right.
A terrific observation, Ellen!!
I can't *wait* for the day Loving gets lumped routinely with the other relational decisions like contraceptive and same-sex marriage legality that Ginni's best friend wants to overturn!
—
You mean Ginni’s sex slave?
"Best friend" is Ginni's undercover (so to speak) name for C., not mine.
—
Ah. I guess “sex slave” isn’t quite as acceptable in polite company. 😉
Clarence is the Manchurian Justice. Ginni is Angela Lansbury
He specifically omitted Loving.
Hmm. Wonder why 🤔
Thomas is going to be one of the dissenters when Loving comes up. Just like he was a dissenter when his wife was in the mix around that SC January order rejecting Trump's bid to withhold documents.
I note this: “let’s take a wild guess and say Brown v. Board of Education.” Not at all a wild guess. Several weeks ago, before the SC’s ruling even became official, some right-wing operative whose name I’ve forgotten declared jubilantly to a reporter: “Next — Brown v. Board of Education!” The wraps are off now, and the right-wingers are no longer concealing their goal, which is to destroy every right women and minorities have gained in the past 150 years.
Note, however, that one of those white guys compared their decision in Dobbs (overturning Roe v. Wade) to Brown v. Board of Education (overturning Plessy v. Ferguson). That's in my list of top 5 outrages, even though it's got plenty of competition. IMO their essential goal is to destroy the federal government and return everything to the states. Women and minorities can have rights (for the time being) if we're lucky enough to live in states with Democratic/democratic governments. What they're really trying to overturn is the outcome of the Civil War.
Keep in mind a recent survey of GOP voters that revealed ONE THIRD of them wish the South had won the Civil War! That means there are millions of Americans who would love to see slavery reinstated.
Yes. I keep that in mind all the time. It is inconceivable to me personally to think that way, but I know that a healthy percentage of Trump voters, especially in the deep South, feel that way.
Remember, Trump enrolled them all in 2011 with his Obama birther nonsense.
None of them heard his 2016 admission that Obama was born in the USA.
Yes. More proof, as if any were needed, that the Trump presidency is the backlash to the Obama presidency.
“Nonsense“ is the courteous name. Trump is an overt racist, and his birther accusation was blatantly racist without appearing to be so. The definition of a dog whistle. In time, the witness reports will come out that Trump called him a nigger. Just not in front of the cameras.
I can't wait till "Justice" Thomas comes out against interracial marriage. He'll probably go after the 13th Amendment next.
The Lost Cause is alive and well.
SCOTUS handed us three decisions this week, with a fourth pending for next. In addition to Roe, we will now have the scourge of being an open-carry state, and the separation of Church and State was chipped away at too. Next week we have the decisions about the Federal Government’s right to make environmental decisions. When at least 5 of the so-called Justices vote to hamstring the Federal Government, you can rest assured that they will aim their sights at Social Security, Medicare and Medicare, and OSHA, and possibly the IRS as well. The net results will be the empowering of States at the expense of Federal Legislation. Chaos awaits.
I'm trying to fantasize a country in which a majority of people believe that the permanent threat to democracy is more serious than temporary inflation. This isn't easy.
The 1st three SCROTUS decisions now allow lawful assasination, indoctrination, and impregnation, keeping us afraid, loyal and barefoot. The 4th next week will be their underlying goal - declaring natural resources for industrial raping. And my environmental engineer dad thought Neil Gorsuch was "such a nice boy."
Just added SCROTUS to my lexicon. Thank you!!
My OCD compelling me to correct (sorry MaryPat), SCROTUS is a title of non-endearment for a President, not the SC. So Called Ruler Of The United States, I believe I first heard it in the 70s or early 80s (Trick Dicky Nixon?) but the acronym has had a resurrection since 45's election.
I don't remember that, and I was a sentient adult (and political junkie) during the Nixon administration. Maybe it was a guy thing? <g>
The strategy is very much like the recall attempt of Gavin Newsom. The Republican Party in California is nearly powerless, with a Democratic super majority in both houses of the Legislature, and with the Republicans never able anymore to win a state office. So they are desperate, and the recall is the only path to try to put a reactionary Republican back in power.
By returning power to the states, it’s the only chance for the reactionaries (sexists, racists, antisemites, genderists et al) to impose some last desperate regressive laws on society. However, equality and diversity are the wave of the future. The Borg is bearing down on them, and they will be assimilated.
Similar situation here in MA, although our sitting governor is a Republican. He's not running for a third term, and many of us suspect it's because he might have been primaried by the loonies who've taken over the state GOP. (Their latest gambit is a suit to overturn vote by mail, a temporary provision during Covid that was just made permanent by our VOTES Act.)
I hope CA's legislative Democratic supermajorities are more solidly liberal/progressive than ours A significant chunk of ours, esp. in the House, are at best shaky on "social issues," including abortion rights. We've also got arguably the least transparent state legislature in the country, and again, the House (including its leadership) is the big problem.
We now have permanent Vote by Mail here in California. We receive our ballots in the mail, along with candidates’ statements, etc. We have several options for voting. We can drop our ballot in the mail, drop it off in a secure drop box near us, vote early at a Vote Center or vote in person on Election Day. You don’t have to vote in an assigned Vote Center; you may vote at any Vote Center in the county. The downside is that it takes weeks to count all the ballots, so a winner cannot be declared on Election night.
I like it, though I wonder if a swing state could get away with taking that long to count all the ballots. TFG went ballistic in 2020 because the results weren't final on election night, and of course no one could explain to him how elections work in the real world. Can voters show up at a Vote Center without the ballot they received in the mail and get another ballot? It's not hard to imagine mislaying the ballot, spilling coffee on it, or having the dog eat it.
You vote in person, like we all used to do. You give your name (as printed on your sample ballot), address, and sign your name when you go to a Vote Center. You then vote at a computer terminal, which prints a hard copy, which is inserted into a slot on the terminal. This can be done at any Vote Center in the county. We used to have to vote at our own precinct but not anymore.
P.S. in mid-October: The 1/6 hearings, especially the 9th and most recent of them, have revealed that TFG *didn't* go ballistic "because the results weren't final on election night." This tantrum was planned well in advance. It was part of a plan to discredit the election results if it looked like he might lose.
The next case to go down is the EPA case in W VA. That case will be devastating to not just the EPA, but the whole ‘administrative state.’ It basically says that the EPA doesn’t have the authority to make the rules, for say, carbon emissions, etc, and that role is Congress. So…Congress will then be expected to explore the science, etc and then make the laws governing such science. You can see where this is going…
MTG, Gaetz, Gohmert...et al.
The new anti-Roe decision boils down to one thing:
Sexism.
Discrimination against women. The control and subjugation of women. The wet dream of every male sexist like Clarence Thomas is to be able to change society and laws to control, restrict, subjugate, and suppress women.
What is a conservative? A conservative is somebody who wants to keep the old history and traditions. Because society keeps turning against racism and sexism, they keep having to change their name. In the 1800s it was slaveowners. During the Civil War it was the Confederates. Then the KKK was formed. Then they all became part of the Southern Democrats. Then after LBJ’s Voting Rights Act, they migrated over to the Republican Party. Now they call themselves Originalists.
People who like Trump, people who like racist and sexist policy, they are never going to go away.
The backlash to the Obama presidency is continuing. The white supremacists and male supremacists, the people contemptuous of gender and racial equality, will continue to lie cheat and steal to keep society the way they want it. Racists and sexists are a minority now. We have to get our butts in gear and make sure they don’t keep running the show despite being on the decline.
I am a woman well past child bearing age, but that doesn’t mean I’m not enraged by this “Supreme” Court ruling. Taking away a woman’s right to choose when and if she has children takes away her right to live a life she chooses for herself. In my opinion, because there is no 100% effective birth control, this “Supreme” Court has relegated sexual intercourse only to those people who are intentionally trying to create a child. This is absolutely draconian.
Actually, it is absolutely Roman Catholic. It’s shoving conservative Catholic theology down everyone’s throats: the assertion that sex should be engaged in ONLY by a man and a woman who are open to conceiving a child. All others must abstain permanently from any sexual activity or relationships.
I grew up at the knee of a grandmother warning that electing a Catholic president would invite the Pope to take over the White House. Wrong! The danger was one Connecticut Yankee, one evangelical, and one self-worshiping president who would appoint RC SCotUS justices out of step with their more benevolent Pope (Justice Sotomayor being the exception who provides the norm).
Ok, Di Fi, I plead stupidity. I know the Catholic president and the self-worshiper president. Who are the Connecticut Yankee and the evangelical?
The Bush Georges, I and II. But c'mon, you knew that!
If you had said the Saudi whores, I would’ve nailed it.
Ok, you’ll have to let me have a momentary lapse. I’ve been out of California and in Washington state 4 weeks now; it’s been super disorienting. Still adjusting to having a Washington driver’s license, among many other things. If that’s my only glitch here on this forum, that’s a victory. 😘
If your excuse isn't age I'm envious.
Yes draconian, and also Catholic. Or at least that's what the nuns taught us. Sex is only for reproduction.
So Alioto and his wife, Kavie and his wife, Gorsuch and his wife and Thomas and Ginni don’t have sexual intercourse? That explains a lot!
I’m SO glad I spent much of my life studying American History and law, even if only to be able to comprehend fully the legal and practical impact of the twisted, craven decisions of this right wing (way beyond “conservative”) majority. Execrable, in crystalline form. Richard Cole. Cornell University ‘72 magna cum laude American History; Harvard Law School ‘75.
Mr. Cole. Ah, if only the unwashed masses in our body politic has your resources and educational advantages. They don't so we are now left with what happens in an illiberal democracy where, yes, a majority of those who vote can dictate to the real majority. OH, if only some of those who did not have a civics class in junior high or high school could understand the genius of our Constitution in granting liberty to all regardless of the will of the majority. Why it is almost as if Justices Thomas, Alito, Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch cut those courses when they went to law school?
Oh, I got it. Just trying to point out if it takes that kind of educational level to figure out why this ruling was unjust our nation is in deep trouble. And, yes, we are in deep trouble. Do you or do you not get that? And, just to make another point: it was a large contingent of very well paid lawyers who have for years argued to roll back civil rights and liberties. What is their excuse?
If he is such an originalist, Thomas’s vote should only count for three-fifths of a vote. So these reprehensible tallies should be listed not asc6-6, but as 5.6-3.
“3/5” never gave enslaved Blacks ANY portion of a vote, but was used to count them in census to give whites only even MORE (x1.6) representation by Congressmen in in the House.
Even my “x1.6” is not quite accurate; when enslaved Blacks were counted in the census, then multiplied by .6, that number was added to the number of white males to constitute the number to be represented in the state’s congressional (House) delegation, causing over-representation of white men (the only voters, often requiring ownership of property and/or payment of poll tax) in “slave” states.
Very clever
I guess the point for these six is stripping the 14th Amendment of meaning and returning us to literally the pre-Civil War constitution, which of course included an emphasis on states' rights and no rights to privacy as developed over the years. I bet that privacy is not only important to "libs" but to conservatives and Trumpets as well, but the Trumpets seem determined to define privacy in such as way that says "only for me and not for thee." Garbage.
Yes, Jay, the Supreme Court majority wants to take us back in time to a Stone Age society that we have left behind. Welcome to the past. Welcome to the society where women were furniture. Welcome to Saudi Arabia.
I suspect the real stone age was much more egalitarian.
Yes. I seem to recall that quite a number of Congresspersons who have an "R" beside their names also have a history of "interesting" sexual experiences, one in particular with underage girls. The loss of their "right to privacy" may land them behind bars. I guess they haven't considered that - yet. What goes around comes around and Karma is a you-know-what. And now Karma has been multiplied by many millions of angry women.
. . . and men. 😘
American fascism is on the march. Might as well call it what it is.
Yes, it would appear the six conservative members (OK maybe 5 1/2) of this Court are more than willing to turn back the clock but to the Dark Ages?
These decisions prove beyond a shadow of a doubt elections have consequences and that a way too large segment of our voting public, particularly in red and rural states, are perfectly OK living in the past. For what reason? Evidently , to codify their superiority and dominance over the others in our society who do not look like, think like or act like them. And, that another large segment (roughly one third) who stay home on election day because they are either "too busy" or "my vote doesn't matter) have contributed consistently to giving the right more power than its numbers would indicate.
Thomas's language in his decision is what is really chilling. He is going to push for more revisionism in the future. And while the other Federalist Society blessed judges say in their opinion that is not what they believe we must remember three of these Justices lied during their confirmation hearings about stare decisis although Barrett did clarify her position to say she believed there might be instances when precedent deserved to be overturned.
The Trump nominees are young. They will be pulling the Federalist Society wagon for a couple decades or more. The United States of the late 20th Century is dead. Welcome to the GOP version of The End Times.
I think you describe where we are and how we got here accurately. I'm not so sure about where you say we're going. I doubt the current imbalance between power and popular will can persist in a country where citizens are used to freedom as an everyday reality.
If we take this ruling and the words of Justice Thomas at face value the answer to your question is going to be “where do you live?” We have heard a lot about “Two Americas” in the past. I fear we are about to find out what that means in a large number of places. I am informed by the thinking and writings of Fareed Zaharia on what he calls “illiberal democracy.”
A divide between rural and urban exists in all cultures and surely always has. So? (I recommend @nyfarmer.) You seem to assume that this moment is frozen. The situation is not rational, nor is the backlash. It is timid only at the very top and that does not imply violence. NY is considering declaring that by virtue of population density the city qualifies as a weapons-banned zone. Women are engulfed by fury. The very idea, that a creepy stranger in Halloween costume would presume with some poorly chosen words the right to control your body and your destiny! What next? Women need guardians to drive? Burkas? The Federalist Society and, with all due respect, I daresay you and Fareed Zaharia can only observe the experience, not grasp it at gut level. That requires living it. The beginning has barely begun. The moment is dynamic.
Well, Di. As the father of two modern women and their mother who lives in the 21s not the 18th century I do not need to possess a uterus to "grasp" this problem now facing women. But, it is much broader in that when we start to chip away from the inalienable rights granted to all of us. we are already on the slippery slope to rule of the minority by a majority which is why what Fareed has advanced is such an important principle for all of us. All of our liberties are at stake not just the one most important to any one of us. In this country we live under one Constitution with inalienable rights for all. At least, supposedly.
On a totally different front, I would also simply ask you to welcome all who are supportive of your point of view even if they may not be as wise, intelligent and immediately invested in a particular issue. The reason the right is now driving so much of our political and judicial agenda is over the years it has consolidated a coalition of different forces. On the left progressives seem less capable of doing so because too many of them focus on one single issue and don't seem to realize while it may be critical to them the only strength which matters is at the ballot box. We now see hundreds of thousands marching in the streets. How many of them will actually turn out come election day to vote against the forces which have driven us to this point? That jury is still out as it always seems to be.
Duly noted. I won't belabor my position except to repeat that the prelude has hardly begun.
Yes, as you note, words. Words, words, words. Ignorant, irrational, power-obsessed. I keep hearing on the air that we're stuck with this court and these decisions for decades to come. Really? Really??? How much longer, how many decisions more, is a tolerant majority going to accept—from electoral college to stacked legislative representation and attendant filibuster—reactionary minority tyranny? The life-threatening consequences are unendurable. … How long?
—
Reactionary jokers will keep trying to run society as long as we let them. Bush v. Gore. The Trump presidency. Leonard Leo’s Supreme Court.
The January 6 committee is part of the solution to this problem. Also Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. The DoJ should be part of the solution, but they seem to be MIA under Garland.
The DOJ is working under cover. Watch...
I just hope they’re not undercover so deep that we never see them again.
Politics aside, you ever think that Gorsuch remembers that he’s sitting in Garland’s seat, that Thomas in his heart of hearts knows that he’s a scumbag, that kavanaugh understands that his appointment was a put-up job or that Barrett knows that she’s no more qualified to sit on the Court than she would be to pitch for the Yankees? They all have to know.
Nah— self - delusion is a very powerful thing.
No doubt; I sure couldn't get through a day without it, but then I'm not on the Supreme Court.
I think it’s clear from Thomas’s behavior and words that he is NOT fit to serve and he is in cahoots, along with his wife, with the TRAITORS that want to end this democracy. Roberts has proven that he is a dope and a wimp, and he will be remembered for his lopsided, corrupt court. We all know the three LIARS that tRump and Moscow Mitch rammed through the system. . . The problem with embracing jingoistic, right-wing nut ideology is that you end up with the scourge of humanity controlling government. Well, WTF were all these “outraged” voters starting with the Reagan era? Charles KKKoch managed this power steal, learning from Nixon’s “mistakes.” Well, now we are staring Fascist Nazis down the throat.
Excellent description. Leonard Leo is the architect of this Roman Catholic SC. The Trump appointees all look like complete incompetents to me. Roberts is definitely a dope and a wimp. You have to wonder how this guy gets a coherent sentence out, he looks like a mentally deficient sap.
America has just been attacked by judicial terrorists.
I spent the day yesterday vacillating between anger and disbelief. I remember watching the Anita Hill hearings when I was 25 years old. I felt in my gut that he was GUILTY of everything she was testifying to and more. There’s always more whenever you find the kind of despicable behavior that Clarence Thomas was being accused of.
Robert Reich wrote yesterday about being in law school with Clarence, and Hilary and Bill Clinton:
“In those classroom discussions almost fifty years ago, Hillary’s hand was always first in the air. When she was called upon, she gave perfect answers – whole paragraphs, precisely phrased. She distinguished one case from another, using precedents and stare decisis to guide her thinking. I was awed.
My hand was in the air about half the time, and when called on, my answers were meh.
Clarence’s hand was never in the air. I don’t recall him saying anything, ever.
Bill was never in class.”
Voting matters. I am disgusted and sad. My hope is that these events anger enough people to motivate them to go out and vote in the midterms so we can get a Democratic majority, a real majority, in senate and the house.
I struggle to understand how a clump of cells has more rights than a fully formed human.
It's going to get much, much worse.
Expand the court. NOW
Or find a different, better way to achieve balance. One way or another it *must* happen. This can't go on.
No, it can’t. It has to end. The backlash to the Obama presidency, in the form of Trump and the January 6 Conspiracy and a Supreme Court exhumed from the Confederacy: it has to end.
Wait till a trigger state tries to nab ladies at their border.
This will get very dangerous and very stupid quickly.