Agree Agree:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 121 to 126 of 126
  1. #121

    Re: Supreme Court Watch 2012-2013

    Quote Originally Posted by dryrunguy View Post
    A few. But they're not very open about it.
    ...Well, of COURSE not.

    P.S. Congrats for all of us.
    Old News= Madison Brengle. New News- It's All About Amanda Fink Chichi Scholl, FULL CIRCLE OF LIFE MADISON BRENGLE BABY!!!!!!!!

  2. #122
    Director of Nothing
    Forum Moderator

    Awards Showcase

    mmmm8's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    New York, New York, United States
    Posts
    51,048

    Re: Supreme Court Watch 2012-2013

    Quote Originally Posted by mmmm8 View Post
    Just learned my friend's law firm was handling this case
    Another friend from college whom I haven't been in touch with that works for that firm (Paul Weiss) just posted a photo of her in a car with Edie Windsor (the DOMA case plaintiff) pulling up to the rally happening in NYC.

    Very proud of her


  3. #123
    Senior Staff
    Forum Moderator

    Awards Showcase

    shtexas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    24,890
    By the way, I watched the decisions this morning on both CNN and ABC. ABC was faster. CNN I guess was scared of making a mistake.

    Sent from my SPH-M930 using Tapatalk 2

  4. #124

    Re: Supreme Court Watch 2012-2013

    Quote Originally Posted by blomgren View Post
    I had to leave work and go sit out in my car in tears. Blomgren and tennisbrp federally recognized and benefit filled...so happy
    So happy for you
    and for all of us!
    Quote Originally Posted by dryrunguy View Post
    The grouping of the majority/minority votes on Prop 8 was not what we expected.
    I was pretty shocked, to be honest. But didn't they vote whether they had standing to defend it? If so, I'm not as shocked, as I think she would have voted to strike it down if it was decided on the merits.

  5. #125
    Contests
    Awards Showcase

    James7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Gaithersburg, MD
    Posts
    6,113
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court Watch 2012-2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Jessie181 View Post
    So happy for you
    and for all of us!

    I was pretty shocked, to be honest. But didn't they vote whether they had standing to defend it? If so, I'm not as shocked, as I think she would have voted to strike it down if it was decided on the merits.
    It was on standing, yes. The dissents went in both directions.
    I disapprove of this message

  6. #126

    Re: Supreme Court Watch 2012-2013

    One of the top judges in the country said the following about the decision on the VRA:

    Shelby County v. Holder, decided Tuesday, struck down a key part of the Voting Rights Act (the part requiring certain states with a history of racial discrimination in voting to obtain federal permission in advance to change their voting procedures—called “preclearance”) as violating the “fundamental principle of equal sovereignty” of the states. This is a principle of constitutional law of which I had never heard—for the excellent reason that, as Eric points out and I will elaborate upon briefly, there is no such principle.

    Section 3 of Article IV of the Constitution authorizes Congress to admit new states to the Union, as it has done many times, but says nothing about the terms on which they are to be admitted. Usually when new states are admitted it is on the same terms as the existing ones. But not always: Utah and several other western states were required as a condition of admission to outlaw polygamy—a novel condition. Not that any other state permitted polygamy. But other states, not having been subjected to such a condition when they were admitted, were free to permit polygamy without risk of being expelled from the Union.

    It’s possible that the federal government would subject a state to unequal treatment so arbitrary and oppressive as to justify a ruling that Congress exceeded its constitutional authority. But Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s very impressive opinion (in part because of its even tone), at a length (37 pages) that, remarkably, one would not like to see shortened—marshals convincing evidence that the reasons Congress has for treating some states differently for purposes of the Voting Rights Act are not arbitrary, though they are less needful than they were in 1965, when the law was first enacted.

    That evidence—the record before Congress—should have been the end of this case. For apart from the spurious principle of equal sovereignty, all that the majority had on which to base its decision was tenderness for “states’ rights.” One doubts that this actually is a primary value for any of the justices. The same conservative majority that decided Shelby had rejected a more cogent argument for states’ rights when it held three years ago in McDonald v. City of Chicago that the Second Amendment—a provision of the Constitution designed to secure state autonomy—specifically, the right of states to maintain their own little armies, the militias, against federal abolition—creates rights against states’ limiting gun ownership. It seems that the court’s regard is not for states’ rights in some abstract sense but for particular policies that a majority of justices strongly favors.


    The majority opinion in Shelby acknowledges that racial discrimination in voting continues, but notes that the situation has improved since 1965 and that the procedures in the current Voting Rights Act do not make a clean fit with the current forms and pattern of discrimination. Ordinarily however a federal statute is not invalidated on the ground that it’s dated. I hardly think the Supreme Court justices believe (as did Alexander Bickel) that “desuetude” is a constitutional doctrine. And the criticisms of the statute in the majority opinion are rather tepid. That’s why the court’s invocation of “equal sovereignty” is an indispensable prop of the decision. But, as I said, there is no doctrine of equal sovereignty. The opinion rests on air.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...aw_is_all.html
    "Even if you dance for your enemy on the rock, he will accuse you of splashing water on him." ~ African Proverb




Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •