Tag Archives: Supreme court

Justice Stevens And Constitution Of America

This fall the silly season will be once again upon the American Congress as Senators examine the qualifications of a possible justice of the Supreme Court who is appointed by a Democratic president. Naturally, it is clear the original intent of the US Constitution expressly states that any justice must agree with views of the Republican party. After all, if that was the original meaning of our Founding Fathers how can anyone disagree? Stevens was appointed by some wacko Republican president who failed to grasp this man was really a Soviet agent in disguise who wanted to destroy the United States.

I am certain during the investigation of any potential nominee Republicans will uncover evidence making clear the man or woman is a radical SOCIALIST who seeks to ignore the ideas of our Founding Fathers. Republicans must stand tall to ensure this supporter of terrorist rights does not secure a position on our highest court.

SAVE AMERICA FROM SUPPORTERS OF TERRORISM!

REASONS TO MAKE REPUBLICANS HAPPY

Following are some reasons members of the Republican party would be very happy.

Michelle Obama love letters to Bill Clinton uncovered.

Thirty five American soldiers killed in Taliban ambush.

George Clooney film bombs at box office.

Pope issues encyclical saying Catholics must vote for the Republican Party in America.

Tony Blair admits to homosexual relationship with George Bush and used it to force the invasion of Iraq.

Voting records reveal Karl Marx in 1860 voted for the Democratic candidate for president.

Oil discovered in Brooklyn, New York. 300,000 black residents will be relocated to Wyoming.

Rush Limbaugh loses fifty pounds and wins dance contest.

Supreme Court rules 5-4 that a strict interpretation of the Constitution confirms right of white to own black slaves.

Document uncovered in “National Treasure III” which reveals Barak Obama was born in Nairobi to a Muslim mother and a Russian father.

US government bails out Republican Party with $500 million grant. Senator McDonnell hails money as evidence this country still believes in free enterprise.

How To Decide If There Has Been A Rape?

The Supreme Court of Sweden (Hosta Domstolen) ruled that unless there was additional supporting evidence the claim by a woman that she had been raped is not sufficient evidence that a rape occurred. The Court overturned a 2008 conviction on ground the testimony of the alleged victim could not be given more weight that that of the accused rapist if there is nothing else indicating that one of them is more credible than the other. A woman claimed a man threatened her at knife point and forced her to have sex with him in the apartment of the man’s friend. The friend was asleep in his bedroom when the man and woman had sex in the bathroom. The alleged rapist then asked his friend to leave at which point the couple had sex in the bed. The friend said he never heard any screams or something to indicate that a rape was taking place.

At the heart of this debate is whether a woman’s claim to having been raped is to be taken more seriously than the denial of the alleged rapist. In the real world, rape often is difficult to prove, particularly when it occurs between two people who know one another and have been dating. Obviously, the issue also deals with individual rights. Perhaps, in the real world there are times when it is simply too complex to uncover the truth about rape.

Republicans Lose- Minnesota Wins

The Supreme Court of Minnesota finally put an end to the Republican charade in the state which has prevented a duly elected senator from taking his seat and working to address the needs of Minnesota. The court unanimously ruled Al Franken the victor after former Senator Norm Coleman devoted eight months of delay and obstruction tactics in order to prevent Democrats in the US Senate to have 60 votes. This episode highlights the decline of the Republican party and its inability to place nation over its own desires. In 2000, Al Gore graciously accepted a vote which many believed was fraudulent, because he would not compel his nation to endure months of bickering and divisiveness. He could have gone through the same process in the state of Florida that Norm Coleman forced is state to endure, but Gore is an individual who places nation before self.

The past eight years have witnessed a Republican party which refused to reach out in a gracious manner to Democrats and work in a collaborative manner during a time President Bush insisted was critical to survival. In 1941, Franklin Roosevelt asked his defeated Republican candidate, Wendell Wilkie, to serve as his envoy in many areas of the world. Not once did George Bush reach out to Al Gore and involve him in opportunities to serve the nation. Bush ran a divisive administration which even stooped to claiming a former senator who had lost both arms and legs fighting in Vietnam was soft on terrorism.

The Republican party has sold its soul for votes and used obstruction in an effort to prevent the American people from having a government which serves its needs. I assume if Norm Coleman ever ran for anything in the state of Minnesota he would be happy to obtain 10% of the vote. Now, it is time to send the same message to obstructionist Republicans in government.

Supreme Court Won’t Tell About Gay Policy

The United States Supreme Court refused to allow a challenge to the existing military policy which prevents lesbians and gays from serving in the armed forces. The famous “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy has been in effect since the 1990s and President Barack Obama has promisd to end it as soon as possible. The Court refused to rule on an appeal from former Captain James Pietrangelo who was dismissed from the service for violating the gay policy. It said the Federal appeals court which threw out his case ruled correctly that the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy is “rationally related to the government’s legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion.” The Federal court was evaluating the armed forces policy through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision which struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy rights.

Hopefully, gays and lesbians will have their rights restored in the coming months when President Obama finally ends the ridiculous idea about not asking or telling. Gays and lesbians have served their nation and should not have their rights violated.

Gay Week For California Gays?

A century ago, progressives were concerned at the control exerted by wealthy businessmen over the government of California and pushed through the concept of a state referendum which allowed the majority of Californians to exert their voices on legislation. As the years progressed, state “propositions” proliferated and all it required were some energetic groups backed by money to place a proposition on the ballot. In many cases, few people even understood the meaning of propositions, but they exemplified the concept of “democracy.” Last fall, California voters by 52% to 48% declared gay marriages illegal. Today, the California Supreme Court will decide if the 52% voice of the people is stronger than the rights of gays to be married.

Over 18,000 gay couples have married since it became legal in California. If the Supreme Court backs the proposition, it is still unclear as to the status of those who already are married. Perhaps, the voice of the people is not always the best route to freedom. Just remember the 1950s when Senator Joseph McCarthy frightened millions with his claims there were “communists” under every bed and thousands of innocent people lost their jobs.

Service Members To Get Equal Legal Rights

The Senate is getting closer to passing legislation which would grant members of the armed forces the right to appeal convictions to the US Supreme Court. Current law allows such appeals only in cases of death penalty. All other appeals can only go as far as the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. Under the present judicial system, military prosecutors can petition the Supreme Court on an adverse decision by the defendant lacks similar rights. Senator Dianne Feinstein, who has pushed the legislation, commented: “Unlike American civilians, members of the American armed forces are denied the basic right to petition the U.S. Supreme Court after losing at the appellate court level. This is simply wrong.”

It is interesting that since Democrats assumed control of Congress, numerous bills have been passed to defend the rights of members of the armed forces. The G.I. Bill of Rights for education, and numerous laws to expand medical services to veterans have been passed. Perhaps, Senator McCain can cite a single example in which he actually initiated such legislation for military personnel or veterans. He did oppose the G.I. Bill on grounds it would hamper recruitment of soldiers.

Supreme Court May Ask And Then Tell About Gays

There is growing possibility the controversial “don’t ask, don’t tell” military policy pertaining to the rights of gays to remain in the service may be headed to the Supreme Court. During the past few months courts have, essentially, ruled both ways on the issue. On June 10th, the 1st Circuit Court in Boston basically ruled the current policy was legal. Judge Jeffrey Howard speaking for the majority said: “Although the wisdom behind the statute at issue here may be questioned by some, in light of the special deference we grant congressional decision-=making in this area, we conclude that the challenges must be dismissed.” However, in late may, teh 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco, reinstated a lawsuit filed by a former Air Force m ajor after she was told she would be discharged for homosexual activity. This decision essentially denied the military power to discharge people based on their sexual orientation.

Although the 1st Circuit Court sided with the military, it urged the policy should receive “tougher judicial scrutiny” because the policy discriminates against a particular group. Given the conflicting decisions, either gays can take their desire for equity to the Supreme Court or the military can ask the court to support its right to decide military policy.

Ironically, there is growing concern within the military concerning the wisdom of the policy including a recent report by retired officers who said changes were needed to allow gays to serve. Retired General John Shalikashvili, former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff came out for repeal of the gay policy. It is time to either abandon the policy or get the Supreme Court to render its verdict on it.

Supreme Court Gun Decision-Vote For Obama Or Else!

The Supreme Court decided that individuals had the right to possess handguns in their home for self defense and over turned laws in Washington D.C. that attempted to control possession of weapons. Justice Scalia, speaking for the 5-4 majority said the Constitution did not allow “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used in self defense in the home.” However, the majority did make clear “it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” The decision opened the door for legislation to prohibit carrying concealed weapons or forbidding criminals and the mentally ill from having them. It also indicated weapons could be forbidden in sensitive areas like in the vicinity of schools.

The 5-4 decision makes abundantly clear that Barack Obama must be elected to prevent the Supreme Court from swinging even further to the right. A McCain election will most probably result in over-turning the right to an abortion.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Bush Prison Policies

The long American nightmare may well be ending as the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the rights of detainees to be accorded historic rights of being able to confront charges of crimes rather than being kept in an indefinite state of limbo in which one is arrested but never told the reason. In 5-4 vote the Supreme Court rule detainees at the Guantanamo prison had a right to appeal to American civilian courts to challenge the fact they are being detained without informed of the reasons for detention . President Bush objected and hinted he might seek legislation to retain the prisoners in the current state of limbo. In a sharp dissent, Justice Scalia raised the spectre of Americans dying because the detainees would flock to battlefields and once again engage in warfare.

It is not surprising the two Bush appointees, Roberts and Alito voted against allowing rights to detainees. This fact is a blatant reason why Barack Obama must be elected president in the upcoming election.