0
   

O'Connor Resigns Supreme Court

 
 
firefly
 
Reply Mon 4 Jul, 2005 07:57 am
Now that Sandra Day O'Connor has announced her resignation from the Supreme Court, who would you want/not want appointed to fill her seat?

How will this affect furture rulings?

Do you see this as good news or bad?

How divisive will the political battle be in selecting her successor?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,012 • Replies: 2
No top replies

 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Jul, 2005 10:13 am
It's the end of the era of the Court protecting and expanding the rights of the individual.

The Court that forms in October under Chief Justice Scalia, (Rehnquist -he of the arm blazoned gown- will announce his departure soon), will be a 6-3 machine for many years. If such things as the Miranda decision, Roe vs Wade, even, I believe, Brown vs Board of Education of Topeka came before such a Court, those decisions would not be affirmed. A challenge to the Voting Rights Acts of 1964 would be upheld and the law rejected as duplicative.

As long as originalists, as Scalia describes himself, are writing the rulings there will be no finding that the State has any responsibility to inform a citizen of their rights, nor does there exist a zone of privacy, much less a right to privacy, pertaining to oneself other than those precluding searches, and, despite the 14th Amendment's wording, the Court's decision in Plessy v Ferguson would be upheld as reflecting the original intent of the people at the time of it's passage. Scalia has already written that he couldn't have ruled that the 14th Amendment covered the right of women to vote, he says it didn't in 1868, it doesn't now. The people have to pass Constitutional Amendment in order to secure their rights according to him.

As to what blacks were supposed to do to secure their rights already covered by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, Justice Scalia has not said, but I think he would agree that the Voting Rights Acts of 1964 are redundant to the Fifteenth and are therefore unnecessary, all black people have to do is ask the States of Mississippi, Arkansas and Georgia to allow them to vote unrestricted. No need of Federal intervention, right?

Joe (Hang on, it's going to be a bumpy ride)Nation
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Jul, 2005 06:46 am
How divisive will this appointment be? VERY.

Already the "fat blowhard" of the Senate, Ted Kennedy, is whining about this. Apparently, Fatty thinks the President should nominate someone that this pinhead "owns".

""If the president abuses his power, and nominates someone who threatens to rollback the rights and freedoms of the American people, then the American people will insist that we oppose that nominee, and we intend to do so," Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy from Massachusetts said."

Abuse of power???? The only person guilty of abusing power is the drunken Fat man who killed someone.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » O'Connor Resigns Supreme Court
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 05/03/2024 at 02:31:12