And with this, the SCOTUS has become officially politicized, and has lost its mandate, so far as I’m concerned. We live in tyranny.
Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | |||||
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
Is there a remedy or is her refusal the end of the line on that argument?
I believe that’s it. Can’t really take her to court, can we?
Probably not. I was wondering if one of the Outlaw lawyers could weigh in.
But ….. Ginni Thomas!!!!!
She can be impeached. Somebody in the HoR can submit a bill of impeachment, pass it, and send to the Senate. Where nothing will happen. Meanwhile we can have weeks and months of the MSM screeching about how the Rs hatehatehate the wimminz.
Darth —
Well, yeah. But with a D Senate it’s a non-starter, because they have no ethics. So I didn’t even bother mentioning it.
At this point, I’d go with impeachment just the same. It’s not really a sin to delegitimize the Court and the Senate when they’re, well, illegitimate.
It is shameful but may not change things much. If Kagan recused and Kennedy goes soft, a four four decision is a win for Obama. With Kagan staying in, maybe Kennedy will be more inclined to go with Thomas, Scalia, Alito and Roberts. Yeah the left will spin this as Kagan vs. Thomas–the two issues are not the same. Thomas is right. Kagan is wrong.
I am still not sure the Court will reverse it. Kennedy likes walking on the wild side and Alito and Roberts are closet statists.
“Alito and Roberts are closet statists”
That’s twice today Joe. What basis are you asserting that?
the useless geriatric and every so courtly piece of shit Richard Lugar was among the five Rs who thought this heifer would make a good justice
You mean even Meghan’s coward daddy voted no?
I think this is a good occasion to remind people to help Richard Mourdock de-Lugarize Indiana in the primary next year
Lee–
Here.
Jeff, that is just more assertion as far as I can see.
Roberts and Alito are “statists”(Joe’s characterization)? I did not know that, and am only wondering where the idea came from.
I mean, this:
Isn’t “judicial restraint” part of constitutional originalism? I don’t see how adhering to the principles of separate but equal branches of government makes one a statist.
Jeff, I don’t think it is correct to say the Senate D’s have no ethics. Of course, they have ethics, just a very different set relying on some very different assumptions about human nature, liberty, and the social contract than you or I have.
Plus, I’ll bet 5 bucks Justices Scalia, Alito, and Chief Justice Roberts, vote with Thomas on this one.
I wasn’t endorsing it, Lee. Just came across it a few minutes ago and figured this may be where the idea is coming from.
For my purposes, the problem with conservative jurists (as opposed to more libertarian jurists) is that they defer far too often to precedence — even bad precedence — instead of worrying about what the Constitution permits. That’s just piling bad law on top of bad law under the auspices of not having upheld the original bad law.
Right. Does bad case law overrule the Constitution?
Or, did liberty die once and for all with Wickard?
We’re about to find out.
If she won’t recuse herself, the Chief Justice should boot her.
Yeah, having the Supreme Court defer to precedence seems kinda cross-purposes to me. I woulda thought every case that comes before that bunch would be measured against constitutional intent first, precedence last.
Mojo, I guess that was my original question about a remedy: if she refuses to recuse herself, can CJ Roberts punt her off the bench for this decision?
The simplest answer to that question is no, he doesn’t have any such power.
I thought not. So, can pressure be put on her to recuse herself or are we just whistling Dixie?
There’s nothing legal that can be done. Bitch is going to vote.
Public pressure is certainly legitimate I think, and the more the merrier. People will speak, write, submit evidence and so on, and that’s all good. In the end though, it’s going to be up to Kagan herself to decide, and then the people’s representatives can make another decision about the questions her decision raises on their own.
Indeed. To stray further into the land of unintended consequences assuming she does go ahead and vote, and I see no reason that she will not, how are they planning to enforce the statute? What will happen if those of us who don’t want to play say “fangool!”? There aren’t enough jail cells or officers to enforce such a law. Unless they get busy building the camps or have them built by prison labor.
What will happen if those of us who don’t want to play say “fangool!”?
We continue on with “Spata me luchi e hace ma goo, tu piccolo mierdas!”
What will happen if those of us who don’t want to play say “fangool!”?
Again: this is why it’s critically important to make sure that proper small-gov Tea Party types take over every state legislature and every governor’s mansion in the 50 states next year. A dozen governors saying, “We will not participate, and good luck trying to force us!” will have a sobering and salutary effect on our would-be overlords in Washington.
Ideally, I wanna see 40 states adopt “Molon Labe” as their license plate motto. I might settle for “Semper Liber” as an alternative.
Cavuto talking about Kagan now.
This is why people should think long and hard before they go around saying if this one or that one wins the Republican nomination they’ll stay home or vote third party. Even the worst of the current crop of candidates would have to be better than Obama when it comes to judicial appointments. The key is to electing enough constitutional conservatives to the House and Senate to hold their feet to the fire when it comes to appointing constitutional jurists.