Five decisions were recently made by the Supreme Court in cases that were pending before it. They all were 5-4 rulings and each time it was the same five for and the same five against. All five of the decisions refute, repeal or ignore past precidents and they unfortunately are a sign of things to come in this country.
In case you were wondering, below are the five jurors who voted to move our country backwards and the ones who are trying to keep these barbarians from the gate:
To me it is as clear as a pane of glass: this is the Bush legacy and its alive and active already. Fuck Iraq: we need to pay attention to what is happening here. This country is quickly becoming much more conservative, less liberal and it looks like it will only continue this way for the forseeable future.
Thanks to the NYT for that image
2 thoughts on “Big Legal Trouble”
I can’t agree with you more. This isn’t the Roberts Court, it is the George W Bush Court and we will be living with the consequences for another 10 years or more.
I think Justice Breyer said it best in the close to his dissent of yesterday’s decision, concerning the use of race in school placement, when he said “It is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much,”
Also with the Supreme Court’s liberal bloc with more members near retirement age than the conservative bloc, it is very important that in 2008 we put a President in the White House who will replace any retiring/dead Justices with those who can bring more balance and fairness to the Supreme Court. Otherwise our nation will only become more unjust over the next few decades.
I also find it disturbing that Justice Roberts said he respected precedent during his confirmation, yet has ignored it (and often common sense) in these 5 decisions. He also said before this term started that he wanted to model his court on that of Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshal, with the court reaching unanimous decisions on important cases, yet has done quite the opposite with several of his decisions bringing scorching verbal descents read from the bench (something rarely done until this court’s session).
Great points. Roberts’ statements during his confirmation only further solidify a jaded public’s belief that public officials will say anything (true or not) in order to get elected and/or appointed and that you cannot ever trust them. Trust is the basic cornerstone of any relationship and if a citizen does not have trust in the officials running the government, then he or she does not trust the government period, which only leads to decline and eventual destruction of said government.