myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
right wing supreme court right wing activism
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 11987
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

what morons think this is democracy... this is banana republic BS and these SC idiots are so stupid, well criminals actually.
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 3793

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just getting even for how the democrats ran the show after 2000. Actually, I believe it should be done fairly, but that's almost impossible.

Quote:
At that time, it didn’t take five years to find a court that would rule against the legislative maps drawn in 2001, he wrote. “Because the 2001 Democratic maps violated the Whole County Provision of the North Carolina Constitution, the state Supreme Court struck down the legislative maps in the Stephenson decisions. The 2002 election maps were drawn by a judge, but Democrats took the opportunity to redraw the maps in 2003.”

Inman pointed out that there was a stark difference in how the Republican Party drew the districts in 2011 compared to how they were drawn in 2001, 2002 and 2003 when Democrats controlled the legislature:

“The years 2000 through 2004 were filled with lawsuits and backdoor wheeling and dealing over lines drawn by a Democratic majority. Those controlling the process ignored complaints from Republicans and even Democratic African-American legislators. … The process was done with no transparency. Lawmakers were barely able to see their districts before voting on them.”

According to Inman, back in 2001, the issue of race was front and center too:

“African-American Democrats revolted at the prospect of a map with very few majority-minority districts, endangering the map’s passage in the closely divided House. Democratic Speaker Jim Black told the public that the map was drawn to ensure that Democrats would have control of the body, and that giving African-Americans more seats would endanger that majority.

“’Every time you change one district, you change districts around it. Every time you do that, you change the balance of power in the state,’ said Black. ‘I personally believe African-American citizens will be better off with Democratic leaders for the next 10 to 20 years.’”

In 2011, Inman also noted an irony that is present today: “Many of the same voices calling for increased numbers of minority-majority seats in 2001 are now decrying the Republican maps for doing just that.”

And while today’s Democrats are now denouncing Republicans for drawing maps to their advantage, Inman noted they once aimed to do the same:
“Democrats have always been keenly aware of the advantage redistricting gave them. As late as 2010, Gov. Bev Perdue told Democrats at the annual Jefferson-Jackson dinner how important it was that they hold onto the General Assembly in a redistricting year. ‘We must have Democrats redraw those maps,’ she said.”


Read more: https://www.nccivitas.org/2016/a-look-back-sheds-light-on-redistricting/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 11987
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900 wrote:
Just getting even for how the democrats ran the show after 2000. Actually, I believe it should be done fairly, but that's almost impossible.

Quote:
At that time, it didn’t take five years to find a court that would rule against the legislative maps drawn in 2001, he wrote. “Because the 2001 Democratic maps violated the Whole County Provision of the North Carolina Constitution, the state Supreme Court struck down the legislative maps in the Stephenson decisions. The 2002 election maps were drawn by a judge, but Democrats took the opportunity to redraw the maps in 2003.”

Inman pointed out that there was a stark difference in how the Republican Party drew the districts in 2011 compared to how they were drawn in 2001, 2002 and 2003 when Democrats controlled the legislature:

“The years 2000 through 2004 were filled with lawsuits and backdoor wheeling and dealing over lines drawn by a Democratic majority. Those controlling the process ignored complaints from Republicans and even Democratic African-American legislators. … The process was done with no transparency. Lawmakers were barely able to see their districts before voting on them.”

According to Inman, back in 2001, the issue of race was front and center too:

“African-American Democrats revolted at the prospect of a map with very few majority-minority districts, endangering the map’s passage in the closely divided House. Democratic Speaker Jim Black told the public that the map was drawn to ensure that Democrats would have control of the body, and that giving African-Americans more seats would endanger that majority.

“’Every time you change one district, you change districts around it. Every time you do that, you change the balance of power in the state,’ said Black. ‘I personally believe African-American citizens will be better off with Democratic leaders for the next 10 to 20 years.’”

In 2011, Inman also noted an irony that is present today: “Many of the same voices calling for increased numbers of minority-majority seats in 2001 are now decrying the Republican maps for doing just that.”

And while today’s Democrats are now denouncing Republicans for drawing maps to their advantage, Inman noted they once aimed to do the same:
“Democrats have always been keenly aware of the advantage redistricting gave them. As late as 2010, Gov. Bev Perdue told Democrats at the annual Jefferson-Jackson dinner how important it was that they hold onto the General Assembly in a redistricting year. ‘We must have Democrats redraw those maps,’ she said.”


Read more: https://www.nccivitas.org/2016/a-look-back-sheds-light-on-redistricting/


the supreme idiots who voted this way just don't care about democracy.

th right wing judges said it was just to difficult for them to get involved. BS...

and it is simple, when the vote does not represent the election, say by 50 percent the other party gets to redraw the entire map any way they want that lasts 20 years.. If by 35% then lasts only 10 years, if by 20% only 5 years. something in that line...

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 19885

PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bernie will solve the topical problem. He says that a biased Supreme Court taints decisions, and in the same sentence says his cure will be to rotate its members unilaterally any time he wants according to his criteria.

Source: his own lips in a recent speech.

The obvious flaw: does ANYONE think he will appoint any conservative or moderate judges or wait two whole days after a decision he doesn't like comes down?

Just more evidence that he is as insane, anti-constitutional, and dangerous as AOC, Falwell, Warren, Harris, and the rest of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 11987
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Wed Mar 04, 2020 9:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

what a fn hypocrite he should be impeached to if we find he got his job via illegal means... and yes several of the right-wingers on the supreme court should be worried as they lied under oath to get their jobs... May they pee their pants when impeached.


supreme right wing idiot...

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/486044-trump-slams-schumer-statement-on-kavanaugh-gorsuch-serious-action

.



.Trump slams Schumer statement on Kavanaugh, Gorsuch: 'Serious action MUST be taken NOW'


Quote:
President Trump slammed Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday for his remarks criticizing the two conservative Supreme Court justices nominated by the president, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch.

Schumer, speaking at a rally with abortion rights advocates outside the court, said he wanted to tell Gorsuch and Kavanaugh that "you have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price."

"You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions," he added.


Trump called Schumer’s comments a "direct & dangerous threat to the U.S. Supreme court."

"If a Republican did this, he or she would be arrested, or impeached. Serious action MUST be taken NOW!" Trump tweeted.


Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts rebuked Schumer’s remarks in a rare public statement, calling the senator’s comments “dangerous.”


Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman said in a statement that the senator's comments were “a reference to the political price Senate Republican will pay for putting these justices on the court, and a warning that the justices will unleash a major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision.”

“For Justice Roberts to follow the right wing’s deliberate misinterpretation of what Sen. Schumer said, while remaining silent when President Trump attacked Justices [Sonia] Sotomayor and [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg last week, shows Justice Roberts does not just call balls and strikes,” he said.

Trump said last week that Ginsburg and Sotomayor, two liberal justices, should recuse themselves from cases involving him or his administration.

A spokesperson for Schumer’s office was not immediately available for comment in response to Trump.


again in our present history it is right wingers that own the guns and use them as their hate talking points to have liberals harmed. The right wing base of the McVeighs, militia, KKK, neo-nazis, proud boys, are all known for hate and threats and/or for killing liberals. And right wingers are proud of it.

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
real-human



Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 11987
Location: on earth

PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2020 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/3/13/1927284/-Supreme-Court-Bar-member-resigns-and-rips-the-Roberts-Court-in-his-letter?utm_campaign=trending


[b]
Supreme Court Bar member resigns and rips the Roberts Court in his letter



[b]

James Dannenberg is a retired Hawaii state judge. He sat on the District Court of the 1st Circuit of the state judiciary for 27 years. Before that, he served as the deputy attorney general of Hawaii. He was also an adjunct professor at the University of Hawaii Richardson School of Law, teaching federal jurisdiction for more than a decade. He has appeared on briefs and petitions as part of the most prestigious association of attorneys in the country: the Supreme Court Bar. The lawyers admitted to practice before the high court enjoy preferred seating at arguments and access to the court library, and are deemed members of the legal elite. Above all, the bar stands as a sprawling national signifier that the work of the court, the legitimacy of the institution, and the business of justice is bolstered by tens of thousands of lawyers across the nation.

On Wednesday, Dannenberg tendered a letter of resignation from the Supreme Court Bar to Chief Justice John Roberts. He has been a member of that bar since 1972. In his letter, reprinted in full below, Dannenberg compares the current Supreme Court, with its boundless solicitude for the rights of the wealthy, the privileged, and the comfortable, to the court that ushered in the Lochner era in the early 20th century, a period of profound judicial activism that put a heavy thumb on the scale for big business, banking, and insurance interests, and ruled consistently against child labor, fair wages, and labor regulations.

(For some reason, blockquote is not working for his letter.)

March 11, 2020

Dear Chief Justice Roberts:

I hereby resign my membership in the Supreme Court Bar.

This was not an easy decision. I have been a member of the Supreme Court Bar since 1972, far longer than you have, and appeared before the Court, both in person and on briefs, on several occasions as Deputy and First Deputy Attorney General of Hawaii before being appointed as a Hawaii District Court judge in 1986. I have a high regard for the work of the Federal Judiciary and taught the Federal Courts course at the University of Hawaii Richardson School of Law for a decade in the 1980s and 1990s. This due regard spanned the tenures of Chief Justices Warren, Burger, and Rehnquist before your appointment and confirmation in 2005. I have not always agreed with the Court’s decisions, but until recently I have generally seen them as products of mainstream legal reasoning, whether liberal or conservative. The legal conservatism I have respected– that of, for example, Justice Lewis Powell, Alexander Bickel or Paul Bator– at a minimum enshrined the idea of stare decisis and eschewed the idea of radical change in legal doctrine for political ends.

I can no longer say that with any confidence. You are doing far more— and far worse– than “calling balls and strikes.” You are allowing the Court to become an “errand boy” for an administration that has little respect for the rule of law.

The Court, under your leadership and with your votes, has wantonly flouted established precedent. Your “conservative” majority has cynically undermined basic freedoms by hypocritically weaponizing others. The ideas of free speech and religious liberty have been transmogrified to allow officially sanctioned bigotry and discrimination, as well as to elevate the grossest forms of political bribery beyond the ability of the federal government or states to rationally regulate it. More than a score of decisions during your tenure have overturned established precedents—some more than forty years old– and you voted with the majority in most. There is nothing “conservative” about this trend. This is radical “legal activism” at its worst.

Without trying to write a law review article, I believe that the Court majority, under your leadership, has become little more than a result-oriented extension of the right wing of the Republican Party, as vetted by the Federalist Society. Yes, politics has always been a factor in the Court’s history, but not to today’s extent. Even routine rules of statutory construction get subverted or ignored to achieve transparently political goals. The rationales of “textualism” and “originalism” are mere fig leaves masking right wing political goals; sheer casuistry.

Your public pronouncements suggest that you seem concerned about the legitimacy of the Court in today’s polarized environment. We all should be. Yet your actions, despite a few bromides about objectivity, say otherwise.

It is clear to me that your Court is willfully hurtling back to the cruel days of Lochner and even Plessy. The only constitutional freedoms ultimately recognized may soon be limited to those useful to wealthy, Republican, White, straight, Christian, and armed males— and the corporations they control. This is wrong. Period. This is not America.

I predict that your legacy will ultimately be as diminished as that of Chief Justice Melville Fuller, who presided over both Plessy and Lochner. It still could become that of his revered fellow Justice John Harlan the elder, an honest conservative, but I doubt that it will. Feel free to prove me wrong.

The Supreme Court of the United States is respected when it wields authority and not mere power. As has often been said, you are infallible because you are final, but not the other way around.

I no longer have respect for you or your majority, and I have little hope for change. I can’t vote you out of office because you have life tenure, but I can withdraw whatever insignificant support my Bar membership might seem to provide.

Please remove my name from the rolls.

With deepest regret,

James Dannenberg[/quote]..

_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15
Page 15 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group