Tag: supreme court

Another Totally BS Misleading Headline

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

3,194 Sonia Sotomayor Photos and Premium High Res Pictures - Getty Images

What do they learn in journalism school that they couldn’t learn from Flintstones reruns?

Search me!

Here’s one you see all the time: “US Supreme Court Does This Or That.” Today, on Gateway Pundit, the flagrant example reads “US Supreme Court Declines to Block NY Vaccine Mandate for Religiously Exempt Health Care Workers” (https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/us-supreme-court-declines-block-new-york-vaccine-mandate-religiously-exempt-health-care-workers/).

Now anyone would think, “Gee, the court did that.” Only the whole court didn’t do it. Reading on, we discover that only one justice, Sotomayor The Wise Latina, all by herself with no one else, heard the case and told the health care workers to get lost. But you read the stupid headline and it’s like the whole court said it!

Nine justices on the Supreme Court have the 50 states divvied up among themselves, and Sotomayor gets New York, all the cases originating in New York.

How is that fair? You live in New York, you need the Supreme Court to safeguard your rights–and what you get might as well be nine Sotomayors. That’s an appalling system.

And on the same page of Gateway Pundit, you have another story of “the Supreme Court Did This Or That”–this time Justice Roberts all by himself with no one else.

It strikes me that this way we don’t really have a Supreme Court. All right, maybe there are far too many cases for just nine justices and one court to hear and decide. But we’ve lived with that system for almost 200 years, and all the alternatives proposed are just awful. Shall we have ten or twenty Supreme Courts? Or keep one, but have 40 or 50 justices on it?

Like so much else, it should have been left alone.

Meanwhile, watch those headlines! They don’t always tell the story.

Supreme Court Protects Electoral College

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

Death Penalty Cases: Say Goodbye to a Unanimous Supreme Court ...

For once they got it right.

Wow! You could’ve knocked me over with a feather. The Supreme Court has voted unanimously that rogue electors who flip their votes to some candidate other than the one their state voted for… can be punished and replaced (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/06/supreme-court-faithless-electors-349728).

You may remember that after the 2016 election there was a big ballyhoo over concerted attempts to get Republican electors not to vote for Donald Trump–and some Democrat electors not to vote for Hillary Clinton. Those efforts didn’t amount to much, in the end, but they did raise the specter of electoral chaos. I mean, once you can bribe or intimidate electors into changing their votes, the whole electoral process is compromised.

Even the libs on the court didn’t want that. Heck, even Chief Justice Roberts didn’t want it.

Democrats are always trying to get rid of the electoral college, which protects the rest of the country from being dictated to by New York and California. They’ve come up with scheme after scheme for abolishing it. Flipping electors is only one of several gambits that they’ve tried. Soon we’ll be seeing new ones.

As much as I cringe from doing it, I must salute the otherwise Far Left justices for whom this was very much a bridge too far. They made the right call and our country owes them thanks.

Uh-Oh! Another Supreme Court Confirmation Battle Looms

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

See the source image

Are we going to let these goons run our country?

Far Left Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is battling cancer again, and a top Democrat apparatchik warns that if she dies or retires, and President Trump has to appoint another justice, the ensuing confirmation battle could “tear this country apart” (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/rbg-scare-david-axelrod-warns-supreme-court-vacancy-fight-could-tear-this-country-apart).

If you’ve been hibernating in a cave since 1960, what former Obama adviser David Axelrod means is that Democrats have enjoyed using the Supreme Court to rule this country, as a kind of super-legislature that rams through public policies and social experiments that don’t have enough public support to get through Congress. Without libs on the Supreme Court we don’t have abolition of school prayer, 60 million abortions since Roe v. Wade, and same-sex pseudomarriage.

And if they don’t have enough Far Left votes on the court, Democrats don’t get to implement any of their crazy policies.

So what Axelrod is doing here is, well, kind of threatening America: like, if the president doesn’t appoint some out-there leftist loon to the Supreme Court, but continues to keep his promise to appoint conservatives who respect the Constitution, the Democrats will state a national tantrum to end all tantrums. Riots in the streets. Violence. America, you’d better do what we want or we will trash this country!

Ginsburg should retire. Her health is very bad and she’s already done more damage than she could ever have expected to do.

As for Axelrod’s threat–so who’s going to run this country, anyway? Antifa? George Soros? Rosie O’Donnell?

If they riot over a Supreme Court nomination, or anything else, smack ’em down and cart ’em off to prison. They have no right to threaten the country.

It’s time for leftism in America to be brought to an end–once and for all.

Dead Judges Can’t Vote

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

See the source image

(Thanks to Susan for the news tip.)

Sounds like it ought to be a movie, doesn’t it? Dead Judges Can’t Vote, starring Shemp Howard and the Ninth Circuit Court.

Actually, it’s a new ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, and a finding that “federal judges are appointed for life, not for eternity” (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-says-vote-of-dead-progressive-icon-judge-does-not-count).

Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the Ninth Circus Court–the “progressive icon” that struck down California’s ban on same-sex pseudomarriage: did you know judges were allowed to be progressive icons? I didn’t. I thought they were supposed to rule on the law, not on the politics–died of a heart attack last year, nine days before the court was to issue a ruling–a case, in fact, in which his vote was the key vote. However, the rule says you have to be alive when the ruling is actually issued by the court: otherwise your vote doesn’t count. The same rule applies to the Supreme Court–and that voided several opinions by Justice Scalia when he died suddenly. They knew how he intended to rule, but with him dead, it didn’t count.

Reinhardt was appointed to the Ninth Circuit by Jimmy Carter, the second-worst president in history. He may not have been the worst judge, but he certainly tried to be.

‘God of Our Fathers’

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

Here’s another one we used to sing in assembly in high school, until the Supreme Court came along and established secular humanism as the official religion before which all others must bow.

Gee, I wish we’d paid more attention to this hymn, and truly taken it to heart, while we were singing it!

You know what we should’ve done? We should’ve ignored them–just as Peter and John ignored the Temple authorities when they ordered them to stop preaching Jesus Christ.

We should have kept on praying, kept on singing, kept on saying “Merry Christmas” instead of “Happy Holiday” (really, could anything be more ridiculous than a holiday whose name may not be mentioned?)–what were they gonna do about it? Throw us to the lions?

Now, this day, today–now is the time to stand back up again: and sing louder.

Pressadint of the Hole World!!!

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

Image result for images of president of the world

Wow we has got a new politickle moovemint hear at the Collidge and it is boned to suckseed! becose all the Interllecturals in the World thay going to bee behinde it.

Hear it is, Pressadint Obomma he shuld be maid Pressadint of the Hole World!!!

It is a tradegy that he not bean Pressadint of Americka no more but thats OK becose Then Hillery she wil have her Chance! It wuld bee even Better “thuojht iff” he becom Pressadint of Evrything!!!

My prefesser “he” is goinge to rite to The Hufington Poest and tel “them” Al Abuot it and he sayed This “wil get the” Ball reely Rolling! I am so exsighted its got My Moth Antenners spining aruond on my four head! Like is “this” the Best Thing Ever or watt???

Al we Got to doo is take This hear praposle rihgjt up to The Supream Cort and they Wil rule “that” Pressadint Obomma he is Nowe “the” Pressadint of al The cuntries al At Once!!!! and thare arent nothing that nobody thay cant doo Abuot it!! and aslo that Way we aslo gets to have World Guvermint too!!

So whatch the Nooze and “yiu” wil seee somthing Wonderfle hapen rihgjt befour Yuor “very” ayes!!!

Supreme Court Justice Bashes Trump

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

Image result for images of ruth bader ginsburg

Have you noticed how everyone who’s bad is lining up against Donald Trump?

One of the reasons our country’s founders gave Supreme Court justices lifetime appointments was to keep them out of politics. The justices are meant to judge cases on their merits, and not have any political axes to grind.

But now we come to Justice Ruth Bader “Way Out on the Left” Ginsburg, who recently expressed her horror of a possible Donald Trump presidency ( http://www.bendbulletin.com/home/4496206-151/a-justice-bashes-trump-too-far?referrer=fpblob ).

Do you think she’ll be fair and impartial in ruling on any controversies involving Donald Trump, his candidacy, or the election itself? If you do think that, would you also be interested in buying a deed to Easy Street?

But these people don’t even try anymore to conceal their contempt for law and propriety. They just do as they please, and the Supremes are the worst offenders of the lot. Whether it’s redefining the basic institutions of family life, or awarding the federal government ownership of our healthcare industry, the only law they recognize is whatever moves them for the moment.

Wouldn’t it be nice, someday, if we had lawmakers who actually obeyed the laws that they enforce upon the rest of us?

‘Every Time I Feel the Spirit’

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

I remember this one from way, way back. Would you believe it? We used to sing this in school! Thank you, Supreme Court, for protecting us from the God who created us, loves us, and secures our salvation through His only begotten Son, Jesus.  You had to make the schools safe for comprehensive sexuality education.

Sing louder, Christians–it may be God will hear us.

Even Republicans Can Do… Nothing!

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

I forbear to comment on libs ‘n’ progs turning cartwheels over the death of conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. They are their own best advertisement.

And of course, here’s their chance to stack the Supreme Court during the last year of President *Batteries Not Included’s second term, enabling him to keep his hand around America’s throat for the next 30 years or so, given the court’s virtually dictatorial powers. His only problem will be to choose precisely which Leftist nudnick he wants to appoint. Jane Fonda? Bill Ayers? Louis Farrakhan? It’s an embarrassment of poverty.

But there’s a Republican majority in the Senate, which means that no one can become a Supreme Court justice unless the Republicans vote to confirm him (or her). No one. All the Senate Republicans have to do is… nothing.

They don’t even have to reject the nominee. They don’t have to vote on the matter at all. If they’re afraid of being called racists, afraid of their own shadows–well, all they have to do is nothing!

Stall for time, if you’re such cowards and dastards that you’re afraid to say “No!” to this president who throws like a girl. Yeah, yeah, we’re workin’ on it, ain’t we goin’ as fast as we can? Oh, darn, I lost that paperwork… Guess we’ll have to start over.

How quickly we forget.

When George W. Bush was president, and Harry Reid the Senate Minority Leader–that’s right, the Democrats didn’t have a majority–he tried to appoint Miguel Estrada to the appeals court in Washington, D.C. For two whole years the Democrats had hissy fits, and filibustered ceaselessly until Mr. Estrada withdrew his name from consideration. Two years!

All the Senate Republicans have to do, for only one year, is Nothing.

Even Beltway Republicans ought to be able to figure out how to do Nothing.

Yes, the Supreme Court Does Exceed Its Authority

Posted By: leeduigon(patty)Posted On:

A reader, Invisible Mikey, has taken me to task for not understanding the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review and for saying that the court, far exceeding its Constitutional authority, makes laws. You can see his full statement as a comment appended to the previous post, “Libs Move to Protect Religious Liberty.”

I have just re-read, twice, Article III of the Constitution, which defines the role of the Supreme Court. There is nothing in there about court decisions becoming “the law of the land” without benefit of legislation.

But we don’t bother with legislation anymore, do we? The court makes a ruling, or the president issues an executive order–“stroke of the pen, law of the land: cool!” And, as if by magic, marriage suddenly becomes the union of two persons of the same sex.

During my lifetime, politicians have used the Supreme Court to do their dirty work for them. Thus school prayer gets abolished, the state religion of the USA becomes secular humanism, abortion becomes “the law of the land” and snuffs out 50 million babies, and now even the most basic institutions of society are not safe from the court’s tampering.

All of these innovations were given to the court to execute because the politics for any one of them just wasn’t right. Introduce a bill in Congress to ban school prayer and see what the voters think of that.

I do not believe the polls that supposedly tell us that the American people are “overwhelmingly in  favor of gay marriage.” If that were so, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for politicians to ride the crest of the wave and redefine marriage using the ordinary legislative process, right under the dome of the capitol building. But again the dirty work was left to the court.

This is not to excuse Congress. Congress makes some truly horrible laws. But the strictly Constitutional remedy, when they do that, is to vote ’em out. Judicial Review was only established years after the ratification of the Constitution–and not by legislation, or amendment, but only by custom and public acceptance of the court’s expansion of its powers. It seemed like a good idea at the time!

I wonder what will be left of the Constitution by this time next year.