Showing posts with label ruling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ruling. Show all posts

Friday, June 28, 2013

"Godless Perverts" ~ Religious Right Upset by Supreme Court DOMA Ruling

photo tumblr_mp41h1xCq91sudc78o1_500.jpg

We have become SODOMITES!
~ mountain lion on Free Republic

That great sucking sound that Ross Perot spoke about is getting louder and louder. Soon I, being heterosexual, will be able to claim it a disability.
~ shadeaud on Free Republic

I would argue that there are no legally married same sex couples, since such a union can’t be consummated due to the biology required.
~ babygene on Free Republic

What comes after “slouching” toward Gomorrah?
~ schmoe on Free Republic

“What comes after “slouching” toward Gomorrah?”
Acts of GOD: earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, fire, famine, pestilence. GOD will not be mocked.
~ stars & stripes forever on Free Republic

Face it. Marriage was lost when government was allowed in.
~ cripplecreek on Free Republic




















I think this is the conundrum and gets back to what you were saying in the opening — whether or not churches should decide this. But it is difficult because if we have no laws on this people take it to one extension further. Does it have to be humans?
~ Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky

. . . if we throw up our arms in frustration and surrender the political arena to the left, it will get a whole lot worse. We are headed toward the criminalization of Christianity. Let me explain.
If a family were teaching its children that the KKK is the correct model for society, people would rightly be outraged. If Child Protective Services found out, that family would face the possibility of having its kids taken away for psychological child abuse.
When it comes to same-sex marriage, the militant homosexual movement and its left-wing media allies have, unbelievably, taken the normal view of marriage and equated it with the kind of raw bigotry I just described.
If we stop fighting, in short order you will not be able to teach your children that God intended them to marry someone of the opposite sex.
~ Garry Bauer on Right Wing Watch

When they say you can't be opposed to the redefinition of marriage unless you're a hater or a bigot, then it seems to me that when some other case comes up they're going to establish some constitutional right or find that marriage is unconstitutional in its current form. That to me will put the death knell in it.
. . . There's a lot of areas in our country where people are going to hold firm to what they know is the truth and what they know is best for children and families and for society and there will continue to be a battle . . . just like Roe vs. Wade.
~ Rick Santorum




Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, September 15, 2012

Wisconsin Judge Tosses Scott Walker's Anti-Union Law

Photobucket

Read the Judge's Complete Ruling Here

Huffington Post Story
The law, a crowning achievement for Walker that made him a national conservative star, took away nearly all collective bargaining rights from most workers and has been in effect for more than a year.
Dane County Circuit Judge Juan Colas ruled that the law violates both the state and U.S. Constitution and is null and void.

In his 27-page ruling, the judge said sections of the law "single out and encumber the rights of those employees who choose union membership and representation solely because of that association and therefore infringe upon the rights of free speech and association guaranteed by both the Wisconsin and United States Constitutions."
Colas also said the law violates the equal protection clause by creating separate classes of workers who are treated differently and unequally.

The ruling applies to all local public workers affected by the law, including teachers and city and county government employees, but not those who work for the state. They were not a party to the lawsuit, which was brought by a Madison teachers union and a Milwaukee public workers union.

The people of Wisconsin clearly spoke on June 5. Now, they are ready to move on. Sadly a liberal activist judge in Dane County wants to go backwards and take away the lawmaking responsibilities of the legislature and the governor. We are confident that the state will ultimately prevail in the appeals process.
~ Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker

Walker's attempt to silence the union men and women of Wisconsin's public sector was an immoral, unjust and illegal power grab. Now, a court has ruled that the essential provisions of Act 10, Scott Walker's draconian attack on public worker's right to collectively bargain, is unconstitutional.
~ Phil Neuenfeldt, President of the Wisoncin AFL-CIO Union, via CNN

The decision essentially creates the (2011) status quo for municipal employees and school district employees because it declared the essential provisions of Act 10 to be unconstitutional.
~ Lester Pines, attorney for the Madison teachers union, via Milwaukee Journal

This is a sound decision by the court that upholds what we were saying all along — that Act 10 violates constitutional rights.
~ Christina Brey, a spokeswoman for the Wisconsin Education Association Council, via New York Times

We believe the law is constitutional. We are reviewing the decision, but we're planning to appeal.
~ Dana Brueck, spokeswoman for Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, via Milwaukee Journal

This decision will help to re-establish the balance between employees and their employers. The decision gives us an opportunity to get back to the Wisconsin values of sitting down and working together to iron out differences, not taking away the constitutional rights of our citizens.
~ Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca (D-Kenosha), via Milwaukee Journal

A judge living in the fantasy world of Dane County has decided they are going to substitute their singular opinion as opposed to the collective will of Wisconsin, through the Legislature and the recall process. We have litigated, reviewed and elected people because of Act. 10. In each case, they say the law works. And it is.
~ Rep. Robin Vos (R-Rochester) , via Milwaukee Journal

Juan Colas is obviously a hispanic, probably got through law school with "affimative action" grades and the same kind of guiltywhiteboy help as Obama. No doubt he is a far left moron, who smolders with resentment against white America, and does everything in his power to undermine our culture.
Americans of European descent demand freedom. WE decide what laws we want, not unelected creeps from the far left. If this punk decision is not overturned, I predict there will be ANOTHER recall, to recall his dumb ass, and undo his wrong-headed idea about the constitution.
The constitution gives power to WE THE PEOPLE, not "we the lawyers"
~ comment by beisbolfan on Politico

Shame on this leftist, partisan activist judge, What an idiot,. This MUST be Overturned. The nation is rooting for Walker and WILL SEE THAT UNION greed and thuggery is topped in its tracks. Americans are so tired of the lazy, bottom-feeder thugs.
~ comment by doveab on Politico

He (Walker) must be on the phone with the Koch Brothers asking them for advice.
~ comment by GOPunishAmerica on Politico

Call Mitt to see if he can convince the judge to self-deport.
~ comment by QueLio on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal

I'm beginning to doubt he ever read the law he is attempting to repeal. This is the conversation that took place on how he made his decision: "Hi judge, this is Mary Bell, President of WEAC, issue a ruling to repeal this law or I'll personally see that you don't get a single vote from a public union employee in your next election. Have a good day - click"
~ comment by Muktown Resident on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal

Legislating from the bench. A Dane county specialty. Wonder how many million more dollars the unions are going to cost the good taxpayers of Wisconsin before this is overturned.
I have about as much respect for this judge as I have for AL Qaeda.
~ comment by TerryN on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal

Without unions you would not have 8 hour work days, fair wages, over time pay, benefits of any kind, safety requirements, paid vacations, medical leave etc, etc,. Whether you are in a union or not you have benefited from unions.
Perhaps you would like to go back to the working conditions of the early 1900's, I don't.
~ comment by clandrummer on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal

This was never an issue for my entire 50 years of living in Wisconsin until the GOP manufactured it as part of Walker's Divide and Conquer strategy.
~ comment by GDFreethinker on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal

Next to be declared unconstitutional is Walkers attempt to impede the right to free assembly.
~ comment by Hartland Badger on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal

If the POS Walker would have worked with these people like he said he would do before the election this stuff wouldn't keep happening. Walker, the liar,is to blame. The GOP wouldn't even acknowledge workers on Labor day. They are anti labor Neocons.
Walmart wage scale is what they want for all workers. Owners worth 100s of billions, that pay their employees less than 10 bucks a hour with no benefits, and the every shrinking middle class of WI, can't get enough of them WI Neocons have given birth to the 2 biggest lying scum bags of all time. John Doe Walker, and Lying Ryan.
Hey WI people, take notice how the rest of the nation is making lying Ryan admit all his lies. You are the only dummies that buy these 2 guys bs hook, line, and sinker. You all deserve to end up poor, and if you keep voting the way you do, you will. WI you can't fix stupid. Now get out there and ensure yourself a huge pay, and benefit cut.
~ comment by samawry on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal

Typical Walker. The judge, whether one agrees with his reasoning or not, based his decision on constitutional rights. Walker, in reply, points to the results of an election (as if a majority can vote to take away the minority's rights). Just another sign of how little the great patriot Walker really understands or cares about the Constitution or individual liberty. Of course, the flock is rushing to criticize the ruling, but I'll be interested to see if any base their criticism on a Constitutional argument. I won't be holding my breath, though.
~ comment by Big Picture on Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal









Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, July 1, 2012

"Mean Jean" Schmidt Has Meg Ryan Moment Over SCOTUS


Photobucket



Huffington Post Story
Jean Schmidt (R-OH) was standing outside the court building as the initial, incorrect reports were starting to circulate. A bystander with a cellphone camera was on hand to catch her impassioned cries of "YES! YES!"
Schmidt then informed bystanders that the individual mandate was struck down before letting slip a final, passionate "YES!"

From Talking Points Memo
Later in the day, after it had become clear that the individual mandate was in fact upheld, Schmidt posted a conventional press release.
I’m disappointed by the Supreme Court ruling. Two years ago, when the Democrats who then controlled the House passed the so-called Affordable Care Act, they were adamant that it wasn’t a tax. President Obama was adamant that it wasn’t a tax. Now, the Supreme Court says it’s a tax. Regardless of how it’s labeled, the law should be repealed.



Photobucket































Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, June 29, 2012

Haters Gotta Hate - Ad Hominem Repubs Attack Justice Roberts Over Obamacare


Photobucket
Classy t-shirt sold by Glenn Beck
















































Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be 'constitutional' does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. While the court may have erroneously come to the conclusion that the law is allowable, it certainly does nothing to make this mandate or government takeover of our health care right.
~ Press Release from Rand Paul R-Kentucky

. . . the Chief Justice was just hell-bound, hell-bent to find a way to make this law applicable, so you know what? As a tax increase it works because there's no limit on the federal government's ability to tax....
. . . John Roberts said (mocking voice) "It's not our job to forbid this, it's not our job to protect people from outcomes, it's not our job to determine what is right or wrong or any of it. We can't forbid this if it's what the elected representatives and the people want." . . .
But what if we were deceived?
. . . What happened today was that we were bludgeoned with a tax that requires us to do what the government mandates. We must do what they say. . . . It is a 'stealth tax' and that's what it was all along. A massive behavior modification program.
. . . Chief Justice says (mocking voice) 'I can't forbid this. It's not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices. I gotta find a way - Congress wants this - I gotta find a way to make it happen. Okay - we'll call it a tax!'
~ Rush Limbaugh

Let’s talk about Roberts. I’m going to tell you something that you’re not going to hear anywhere else, that you must pay attention to. It’s well known that Roberts, unfortunately for him, has suffered from epileptic seizures. Therefore he has been on medication. Therefore neurologists will tell you that medication used for seizure disorders, such as epilepsy, can introduce mental slowing, forgetfulness and other cognitive problems. And if you look at Roberts’ writings you can see the cognitive dissociation in what he is saying.`
~ Radio Host Michael Savage



























Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Justice Scalia's Mind-Boggling Dissent

Photobucket


As a sovereign, Arizona has the inherent power to exclude persons from its territory, subject only to those limitations expressed in the Constitution or constitutionally imposed by Congress. That power to exclude has long been recognized as inherent in sovereignty.

. . . Notwithstanding “[t]he myth of an era of unrestricted immigration” in the first 100 years of the Republic, the States enacted numerous laws restricting the immigration of certain classes of aliens, including convicted crimi­nals, indigents, persons with contagious diseases, and (in Southern States) freed blacks. State laws not only provided for the removal of unwanted immigrants but also imposed penalties on unlawfully present aliens and those who aided their immigration

. . . They may well determine not to remove from the United States aliens who have no right to be here; but unless and until these aliens have been given the right to remain, Arizona is entitled to arrest them and at least bring them to federal officials’ attention, which is all that necessarily entails. (In my view, the State can go further than this, and punish them for their unlawful entry and presence in Arizona.)

. . . What I do fear—and what Arizona and the States that support it fear — is that “federal policies” of non enforcement will leave the States helpless before those evil effects of illegal immigration. . .

The President said at a news conference that the new program is “the right thing to do” in light of Congress’s failure to pass the Administration’s proposed revision of the Immigration Act. Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so. But to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforcing applications of the Immigration Act that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind.

. . . Arizona bears the brunt of the country’s illegal immigration problem. Its citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy. Federal officials have been unable to remedy the problem, and indeed have recently shown that they are unwilling to do so. Thousands of Arizona’s estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants—including not just children but men and women under 30—are now assured immunity from enforcement, and will be able to compete openly with Arizona citizens for employment.

. . . If securing its territory in this fashion is not within the power of Arizona, we should cease referring to it as a sovereign State. I dissent.

~ Justice Antonin Scalia in a blistering minority dissent over the rollback of Arizona's immigration laws

Complete Supreme Court Opinion on Arizona and Dissenting Views




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Scalia Dissent Reads More Like Blog Post
~ Jeff Fecke on Care2Care Blog

Scalia: If States Can Resrict Those Freed Slaves, Then Why Not Messicans?
~ Headline on Wonkette

Scalia has finally jumped the shark....He claims to respect the founding fathers, but his dissent channels the opponents of the Constitution. Back then, opponents argued that the Constitution denied states their sovereignty by giving too much power to the federal government, as with immigration. Now Scalia echoes their complaints that states are being denied their sovereignty. States are not sovereign when it comes to powers vested in Congress, such as the authority over immigration and naturalization.
~ Adam Winkler, constitutional law professor at UCLA

It struck me as so much crying in the wilderness, to be honest. His view is pretty jurisprudentially extreme, and I think it could likely be the last time that Scalia gets to weigh on in immigration issues during his court tenure.
~ Peter Spiro on WSJ Blog

You don't have to turn to Fox News to hear dubious right-wing talking points on legal issues, you can now hear it in Justice Scalia's rhetoric as well.
~ Media Matters ~ "The Fox-Scalia Echo Chamber"

Scalia, who 25 years ago had a certain gift for pointing out the blindness and hypocrisy of certain versions of limousine liberalism, has in his old age become an increasingly intolerant and intolerable blowhard: a pompous celebrant of his own virtue and rectitude, a purveyor of intemperate jeremiads against the degeneracy of the age, and now an author of hysterical diatribes against foreign invaders, who threaten all that is holy.
~ Paul Campos in Salon

After twenty-five years on the Court, Scalia has earned a reputation for engaging in splenetic hyperbole—but he outdid himself this time.
. . . according to Scalia, if Arizona had known what was coming from his colleagues yesterday, they never would have joined the United States. No other state would have either. The Arizona ruling, in Scalia’s telling, would have destroyed the country even before it was born.
Jeffrey Toobin in The New Yorker

...for the conservatives, and for Scalia most of all, legal propriety is absurdly quaint. He doesn’t answer to a nation. He answers to a cadre, a vanguard, of which he is a cherished member, which is about as likely to say no to him as the College of Cardinals is to the Pope, and to which all outside criticism is the chirping of crickets. The crickets will be chirping awfully loudly in the coming days, and I hope at least that this self-satisfied martinet gets an ear-splitting headache.
~ Michael Tomasky in The Daily Beast

Would this Court, voting as it does today, have upheld the 1964 civil rights bill, the statute which declared it illegal to refuse access to someone because of race, at a restaurant, hotel or gas station restroom? Would Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy have approved such a decision or would they have joined in the dissent? Well, maybe Kennedy would have.
The fact is we have the most conservative Court since the 1930s and maybe more conservative than that. These Justices, led by Scalia, believe in original intent. They want to judge cases based on how the Founding Fathers would. Well, the Founding Fathers, need I remind us all wrote in slavery into the Constitution. It took a civil war and a 13th amendment to get it out.
~ Chris Matthews on Hardball, via RealClearPolitics



















Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, June 25, 2012

I Love the Smell of SCOTUS in the Morning ~ With Updates

Photobucket

Continuing the Speculation Fest of Fear, Loathing, Anticipation, and Boredom that started last week as we wait for verdicts on Obamacare and Immigration.

UPDATE: And it's over! No Health Care Ruling until Thursday, sorry!

Today they ruled on three things:

1. Juveniles cannot be given life in prison without parole. Good all around.
2. They refused to hear an appeal from the State of Montana about corporations buying elections, therefore they upheld their previous Citizen's United decision. That's good for Mitt Romney, because as he says "corporations are people, my friends." But the decision will only get the Democratic base more fired up.
3. The biggest deal today - they threw out most of Arizona's state immigration law, except for the right to check someone's papers under "reasonable suspicion." Sheriff Joe Arpaio will be so happy about that, but it's also a win for the Obama Administration.

See future posts as all these issues play out. :)















































































































ZOMG! Immigrants in Arizona!!! (And yes, the show was filmed in Old Tucson) And not everyone was a White Anglo Saxon. The High Chapparral was my father's favorite show. He would roll over in his grave to hear how some Arizona Republicans think about immigration.












10 AM ET



























Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)