Current Topics
The United States v Donald Trump
by rporter314
04:10 AM
The End of the Independent Judiciary
by jgw
09:09 PM
Our modern Sinclair Lewis?
by jgw
08:52 PM
How the octopus got its smarts
by logtroll
08:30 PM
RoundTable for September 2018
by Ujest Shurly
06:58 PM
Code for no black people': New York bar's 'racist' dress code sparks online deba
by pondering_it_all
06:58 AM
Returning rationality to public policy
by NW Ponderer
09/20/18 04:03 PM
The Savage Breast: A Music Clip Thread
by Golem
09/20/18 12:58 AM
Yom Kippur and Kol Nidre
by Golem
09/18/18 06:57 PM
Miscellaneous humor thread
by Golem
09/17/18 10:21 PM
Justice is coming
by jgw
09/17/18 09:37 PM
Flor-i-duh's Governor's Race
by Greger
09/17/18 06:19 PM
‘Unprecedented’: Natural gas expert says ‘over-pressurization’ may be to blame
by NW Ponderer
09/17/18 03:02 PM
George Conway rips Trump over tweet about Obama's '57 states' gaffe
by pdx rick
09/17/18 04:37 AM
Obama's Friday Speech
by pondering_it_all
09/14/18 06:51 AM
Woodward book breaks 93-year publishing record
by Greger
09/14/18 03:01 AM
Mike Rowe on Nike / Kaepernick and 9/11 hero Tom Burnett
by Greger
09/12/18 02:17 AM
The nuclear option
by Greger
09/12/18 01:22 AM
President Petty and Ineffective - a danger to the Republic
by chunkstyle
09/11/18 11:54 PM
stare into the lights my pretties
by Jeffery J. Haas
09/11/18 04:15 AM
Forum Stats
6248 Members
58 Forums
16383 Topics
281979 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#306821 - 05/22/18 02:28 PM The End of the Independent Judiciary
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
It has been forgotten by many, but "the New Deal" legislation was brazenly opposed and successfully undermined by a small but determined minority of individuals. Those individuals were nicknamed, The Four Horsemen by the press - a direct, and poignant reference to the the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. So, who were these master manipulators? A bloc of ultra-conservatives, who just happened to control the Supreme Court of the United States.

It is hard to remember just how bad things were then. A string of corrupt Republicans had run the world economy into the ditch pursuing economic policies that were detached from empirical processes, millions were starving, Communists were to blame for everything while totalitarians were lauded for their decisiveness. The Supreme Court had been under the thumb of a cabal of judicial activists for nearly 40 years, willing to strike down any law, State or federal, that threatened corporate hegemony. The "Lochner era" is looked at as the nadir of judicial thought, "a cautionary tale of judicial overreaching" criticized on both the left and the right. It was a period when
Quote:
American judges steeped in laissez-faire economic theory, who identified with the nation’s capitalist class and harbored contempt for any effort to redistribute wealth or otherwise meddle with the private marketplace, acted on their own economic and political biases to strike down legislation that threatened to burden corporations or disturb the existing economic hierarchy. In order to mask this fit of legally unjustified, intellectually dishonest judicial activism, the progressive interpretation runs, judges invented novel economic “rights” — most notably “substantive due process” and “liberty of contract” — that they engrafted upon the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Sound familiar?

It's back now, with a vengeance, and abetted by perhaps the most venal, corrupt Congress the United States has yet endured. With the anti-constitutional usurpation of the appointment power, Mitch McConnell has almost single-handedly destroyed its legitimacy, and burdened the nation with a new Four Horsemen, who have unabashedly attacked the very foundations of judicial precedent and established ever more creative and flimsy pretexts for imposing their personal biases and warped views on a reeling nation.

Like their forebears who nearly destroyed a country in the throes of its worst economic crisis, this Court is poised to do even more radical violence to our constitutional foundations and the nation at large, and their work has hardly begun. They took a big step yesterday. It took decades to recover the last time, and this group is far worse. If you thought Citizens United was bad, you're in for some eye-opening terror. If we survive it at all - and that is a legitimate if - this will be seen as worse than the Lochner Era. Buckle up.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#306859 - 05/30/18 10:15 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
matthew Offline
newbie

Registered: 03/24/16
Posts: 353
'
It will be made infinitely worse by Trump's appointments to the lower courts.

Almost the first thing Hitler did was to pack the German judiciary with his supports --- once he had done that, he had secure control over the German state.
.
_________________________
Once, weapons were manufactured to fight wars; today, wars are manufactured to sell weapons

It is far easier to deceive folks than to convince them they are deceived

Top
#307179 - 06/30/18 06:56 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: matthew]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
I was genuinely astounded that Alito cited to a Lochner-era precedent in his Janus v. AFSCME opinion. That case has been so thoroughly discredited that no rational jurist would rely upon it. Seriously. That accurately describes the absolute paucity of intellect involved. We are in for dark days. Dark ages, even. A New Lochner Era - Slate. It's really not possible to capture how bad this is. The current four horsemen are about to be joined by a fifth. It took 40 years to recover from Lochner. This could destroy the United States Constitution. That is no exaggeration. Voting rights, gone; elections, stacked. Equal justice; due process; fair trials; limitations on police; constraints on the President - all the hallmarks of "liberal democracy," those principles that the Constitution has stood for for centuries. And elections won't matter, because the court can undo or block them.

If ever there is a time to stand up, this is it. If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton, this is your fault, period. No excuse suffices.

Top
#307182 - 06/30/18 07:44 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14195
Loc: Florida
Quote:
If ever there is a time to stand up, this is it. If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton, this is your fault, period. No excuse suffices.

But NWP, you just don't understand! It's the Democrats fault...her emails...the leadership...third way...corporate...status quo...progressives will fix this...the Bernie plan...
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#307193 - 07/01/18 02:17 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13267
Loc: Whittier, California
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#307200 - 07/01/18 03:49 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
chunkstyle Offline
journeyman

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 965
[quote=If ever there is a time to stand up, this is it. If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton, this is your fault, period. No excuse suffices. [/quote]

There is enough evidence that shows defections to third party candidates or opposition candidates from primary supporters to refute this silly logic that it was the reason were in the mess were in. Nothing up until the election could have been responsible, no policies or miscalculations. Nothing to learn here on team blue. No alternative paths or course corrections. History has only begun and ended with this past election when the candidates announced their intentions to run.
Don't look to the British snap elections nor the most recent presidential election of Mexico, Organized labor strikes in Red states, etc...
No, it's because of an imaginary number of defections from a historically unpopular democratic candidate that the democratic party machine insisted on. That must be the reason. I see the truth of it and not the 3 decades I've just lived thru.


Edited by chunkstyle (07/01/18 03:50 PM)

Top
#307202 - 07/01/18 04:38 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
Chunk, just admit it. You are the problem. wink

I think, by and large, the voting population simply didn't see the Supreme Court as the issue that it was in the 2016 election, consistent with past history. I am more sensitive to it, since that is the bailiwick that I've lived in for 30+ years. Now, alas, it is too late. (By the way, cs, I don't think you can establish your claim empirically. To wit: Family Feud: Democratic Activists v. Dem...tained Majority.)

Top
#307208 - 07/01/18 07:30 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13267
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
(By the way, cs, I don't think you can establish your claim empirically. To wit: Family Feud: Democratic Activists v. Dem...tained Majority.)


NWP, you need to get your sarcasm detector tuned. wink
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#307209 - 07/01/18 07:38 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7885
Loc: North San Diego County
All of those different things combined to give us Trump. Just about any single one of them could have given Clinton a win. It's no use arguing over it. We're all right.

If third-party voters and Sanders supporters had turned out and voted for Clinton, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now. If Comey had timed his press releases differently, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now. If the Russian Troll Farm had not attacked relentlessly, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now. If Republicans had not spent the last 30 years defaming the Clintons, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now.

Top
#307210 - 07/01/18 08:38 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: pondering_it_all]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
Thanks, Pia, for pointing out the main point.

Top
#307213 - 07/02/18 01:55 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: pondering_it_all]
chunkstyle Offline
journeyman

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 965
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
All of those different things combined to give us Trump. Just about any single one of them could have given Clinton a win. It's no use arguing over it. We're all right.

If third-party voters and Sanders supporters had turned out and voted for Clinton, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now. If Comey had timed his press releases differently, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now. If the Russian Troll Farm had not attacked relentlessly, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now. If Republicans had not spent the last 30 years defaming the Clintons, we would not have Trump appointing his second SC nomination now.


A lot of things gave us trump. I would disagree with your list. THAT is the main point of my argument.

Sanders primary supporters defected at the historical average that all losing primary candidate voters have defected. An exception to this is the amount of Hillary supporters who went republican in her failed primary bid against Obama. Stop scapegoating Sanders supporters. They did they're job and voted for her at historical levels of losing candidate support.

The Russian troll farm is a joke when compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars that were spent by both candidates campaigns and the hundreds of millions of dollars more spent by their dark monies. Well over a billion dollars was spent on propaganda by both candidates to influence public perception. Last I heard, the estimated amount of buy in by the Russians was around 600K.They must be internet Clickbait and Meme geniuses! I must admit, I was almost swayed when I saw Jesus arm wrestling Satan for Trump. For a moment I thought 'Maybe I'm wrong about this guy from Manhattan'.
Comey was a dick. No argument here.




Edited by chunkstyle (07/02/18 01:56 AM)

Top
#307214 - 07/02/18 02:26 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
chunkstyle Offline
journeyman

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 965
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Chunk, just admit it. You are the problem. wink

I think, by and large, the voting population simply didn't see the Supreme Court as the issue that it was in the 2016 election, consistent with past history. I am more sensitive to it, since that is the bailiwick that I've lived in for 30+ years. Now, alas, it is too late. (By the way, cs, I don't think you can establish your claim empirically. To wit: Family Feud: Democratic Activists v. Dem...tained Majority.)


PIE CHART FIGHT!!!

Rilly NWP, what is with centrists and their pie charts and graphs!

O.K., I read the article and the first thing that struck me is that it's relevant only in as much as it's looking at the people who voted. What about the people who didn't vote? Why aren't they voting? Cortez's win may give some clues.

Working in a primary can give you some more. Democratic primaries are decided by a very small percentage of voters. single digits. Candidates like this as they only have to focus on the reliable voters that show up and vote and can forget the rest. Costs less too. That worked until, in Crowley's case, it didn't. She brought in more voters than the usual. Enough to do the job to win and show the vulnerability of counting on a small slice of the electorate. How did she bring them in? By going populist and going left she energized a base of voters that had been ignored.....

Finally, the primaries themselves are closed off from Independents. Sanders has called for allowing independents to vote in the primaries to make the party more inclusive to the process. The party has said NO. An independent that is invested in a candidate by voting in the primary is one, I'm gunna guess, that will stick around and vote thru in the general. But again, your referenced article doesn't address these concerns or observations.
I hate to break it to you, bruddah, but the Brooklyn squad was looking at similar numbers and analytics. Remember all the pre-election hype of the amazing machinery the Clinton machine was. Guess what?
It didn't have a left turn signal and couldn't drive to Michigan. The numbers told them they didn't have to.


Edited by chunkstyle (07/02/18 02:35 AM)

Top
#307215 - 07/02/18 05:09 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7885
Loc: North San Diego County
The Russians may have only spent $600,000 but they spent it on bots, and bots are fantastically cheap. Not to mention that they spent most of that money paying their Russian employees in Russia, where wages are a lot less than the other people spending non-bot dollars for American products.

Simply based on my experience in the months before the election, everywhere I went online that allowed user posts was FLOODED with Russian troll posts. As such it was probably the most massive campaign ever carried out online.

Top
#307217 - 07/02/18 01:52 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
chunkstyle Offline
journeyman

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 965
Almost all comment sections devolve into food fights and have been since the dawn of the internet. It may have re-enforced some voters bias, others not so much. Have you had your mind changed by comment postings? How deep into a 3k post comment thread do you go PIA?

Final thought NWP, How does the articles' analysis square the dynamics of the past election with all the left/right leaning activists vs moderates, etc, regarding the decidedly left Sanders primary campaign? Polls were showing him leading by wider margins against Trump as compared to Hillary.
I wonder if the politico's who are downplaying Cortez's victory over Crowley are also looking at pie charts and graphs and concluding it was an anomaly based on race identity and her opponents neglect and drawing the wrong conclusions because, you know, the data informs their logic, etc....

My apologies for pulling the thread off topic (again).


Edited by chunkstyle (07/02/18 01:56 PM)

Top
#307228 - 07/02/18 08:17 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
jgw Online   content
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2097
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
Couple of things. First, not all states force the voters to declare for a party. I live in the state of washington and our voting thing is, I guess, different. We don't have to tell anybody anything about our party stuff, we also have the top 2 system (the top two in a primary are the final candidates, regardless of party so, for instance, two dems could face off against one another). We also have our ballots mailed to us so we have the onerous duty that requires us to put a stamp on the ballot and mail it back or drop it off at the courthouse. The ballot system is so hard that, in our last election, a whole 38% voted (the final NOT the primary).

Top
#307233 - 07/03/18 05:04 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
Here's the thing, Chunk. Pie Charts are just graphical representations of the empirical evidence. They are just a way of demonstrating in digestible form the information they are derived from. There's a lot of grousing going on, here. But there is no refuting Pondering's point: "All of those different things combined to give us Trump. Just about any single one of them could have given Clinton a win." Clinton did win the popular vote. It should not have been close, actually. But it was. The difference, really, was discipline. The Republicans voted for their candidate. The Democrats didn't (in the right places). A change of 80,000 votes out of 128,838,342 or .0621% would have changed the result (or about 1/36th of Clinton's popular vote margin).

I'm sorry, but, having been steeped in Political Science since I was a Freshman in college, I tend to think in terms of analysis rather than speculation. The argument that "Bernie would have done better" is meaningless for all kinds of reasons, not the least of which is that it is purely counterfactual. The same polls that are used for that argument also projected Clinton to win by a landslide (she didn't). Statistically speaking, the margin of Trump's victory can be entirely demonstrated to have been the result of Comey's actions. The Comey Letter Probably Cost Clinton The Election - Fivethirtyeight. There are other reasons, of course, but that is as good as any.

As you noted, of course, this should all have been relegated to a different thread. This thread is supposed to be about the judiciary (or lack thereof).

Top
#307236 - 07/03/18 06:12 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: pondering_it_all]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13267
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
The Russians may have only spent $600,000 but they spent it on bots, and bots are fantastically cheap. Not to mention that they spent most of that money paying their Russian employees in Russia, where wages are a lot less than the other people spending non-bot dollars for American products.

Simply based on my experience in the months before the election, everywhere I went online that allowed user posts was FLOODED with Russian troll posts. As such it was probably the most massive campaign ever carried out online.



Do corporate controlled "bots" have free speech rights?
According to the logic of Citizens United, it would appear that they do.
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#307240 - 07/03/18 03:33 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: Jeffery J. Haas]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
America's Red and Blue Judges - the Atlantic. "Not since the New Deal crisis of 1937 has the Supreme Court been so clearly revealed to the world as fully enmeshed in the rankest partisan politics. There seems little prospect of disengagement any time soon." This year, every major decision by the Court was a Republican decision.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#307296 - 07/06/18 10:27 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Offline

Pooh-Bah

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 14195
Loc: Florida
Quote:
This year, every major decision by the Court was a Republican decision.


You'll hafta get used to it, there's gonna be a bunch of years like that.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#307305 - 07/08/18 03:13 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
rporter314 Online   content
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6483
Loc: Highlands, Tx
The problem I see with any nominee is whether he/she is loyal to Mr Trump, which would should be of great concern as that person probably will be involved in any SC proceedings regarding Mr Trump and his possible criminal activities.

He would have the current crop of Republicans who have no integrity and a SC which would side with him on every issue.

This could be as close to a dictatorship in America as we have ever seen or imagined. We may actually be frakked.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#307322 - 07/09/18 04:49 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
When Gorsuch was the nominee, I was of the opinion that it should be fought tooth and nail, for precisely this reason. Sadly, it could still get worse. Ginsburg is 85 and Breyer is 79. Although neither plans to retire...
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#307323 - 07/09/18 07:03 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
jgw Online   content
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2097
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I was just re-reading this topic. There was a section where folks were talking about how trump won. I think that one is pretty simple. First Hillary. She has been maligned and lied about for about 40 years. During that time she never fought back once to my knowledge. When she debated Trump he was wandering around the stage in a threatening manner and she didn't even call him on that! (even she said she should have done something!) Think on it, Trump was fighting and Hillary was being civilized. If you thought the country needed a change which one would you choose? The one who didn't fight or a fighter? (I voted for Hillary but half the country (or thereabouts did). That is just the tip of the iceburg.

The Republicans took something like 60% to 80% of the states legislatures. One would think that the Dems might have been kinda interested in how and why that happened. Apparently not, it happened very quietly and seems to have come as a genuine surprise which tends to make one think that they were not actually awake when that happened. If you are in a situation wherein you are losing over the course of several years, and you continue as if nothing is happening then I would submit there is a problem that needs fixing. The Dems, however, stuck to their 'civilized' behavor of failure.

There are any number of examples like this but to continue would be beating the dead horse. Now the Republicans are likely to take over the supreme court. When the Republicans held back the Obama supreme selection the Dems should have sued and screamed their heads off. They actually waited a bit after the Republicans bravely said they would do that and then all they did is run their mouths. Now they are running their mouths again and they are going to lose - again.

Seems to me that the blame is soundly in the camp of the left. They got snookered and beat up. My hope is that they stop the whining and get on with figuring it out, and starting to win. They have a chance but would be wise, this time, to actually pay attention (as well as other things) I am equally convinced that they are a lot more that vote against the right than vote for the left, with reason. It would be really nice if we could all actually vote for the left. To have that happen the left, the ENTIRE left, needs to sit down and figure it out instead of having them whiney little foodfights over, really, very little.

As always I wish us all good luck.....................





Edited by jgw (07/09/18 07:04 PM)

Top
#307324 - 07/09/18 07:18 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
rporter314 Online   content
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6483
Loc: Highlands, Tx
Can they outlast Mr Trump?

The next SC nominee with be confirmed solely because he/she will be PC and not answer any questions. Look ... I don't care what their personal political or sociological positions are as long as they follow the Constitution. Unfortunately partisans are only concerned with which political positions a nominee has.

We are in danger of losing of republic ... and it won't be on the battlefields fighting terrorists nor will it be by presidential fiats .... it will be in the quiet halls of 1 First St, NE, Washington DC
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#307330 - 07/09/18 09:20 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
jgw Online   content
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2097
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
My fond hope is that one or more of these new members will turn out, over time, to not exactly embrace the left but embrace obvious logic instead of political druthers. Its happened before and can again. Remember, they are there for life and they will not lose their job for doing their job, irregardless of politics, unlike our elected class who tend to to whatever it takes to keep their jobs - irregardless of party or even personal belief.


Edited by jgw (07/09/18 09:21 PM)

Top
#307336 - 07/10/18 04:12 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
In the past (say, Nixon-era), it was possible that a Supreme Court nominee might "drift" from their expected bend. That, however, has not been true since Nixon.

Top
#307337 - 07/10/18 06:23 AM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
pondering_it_all Offline
veteran

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 7885
Loc: North San Diego County
I wonder how many cases before the Supreme Court Kavanaugh will have to recuse himself from, because of his history. I know he was on Kenneth Starr's team investigating Clinton and recommending impeachment. I wonder if that will disqualify him on some Trump cases.

Top
#307339 - 07/10/18 02:30 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
The problem is, there is no standard for Supreme Court recusal. He gets to decide.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#307341 - 07/10/18 02:55 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
rporter314 Online   content
old hand

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 6483
Loc: Highlands, Tx
There is a report which if true rings of real corruption, in the sense it has greater impact than simply stealing money.

J Kennedy's son apparently was involved in loaning Mr Trump money through Deutsche Bank AG. J Kennedy apparently made contact with administration officials to broker a deal for retirement contingent on an approved replacement which was precipitated by the Mueller investigation which it was thought could lead to SC considerations on presidential powers. It is thought J Kennedy would, because of his integrity, recluse himself. Thus Mr Trump would be able to "pack" the SC with justices who would be loyal to him and rebuff any assault on him, even if justified.

If this is true, it is certainly a dark day ... no a blot of the worse kind, not just on our history but on the American people for allowing this behavior.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty

Top
#307352 - 07/10/18 06:30 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
jgw Online   content
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2097
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
I find it interesting that it would seem that the Supremes are somehow contaminated and guilty before they have really done something to show their evil ways. So far they seem to have ruled in favor of the law and not in favor of politics. Now there is a new guy joining them and his history would be, pretty much, slightly to the right. This is based on a number of reports of people who are touted as being experts on the Supremes. However, the Dems, valiantly closing the barn door after the horses got loose, are telling us that life on earth, as we know it, will be negatively changed forever.

I would suggest that before condemnation they might wait and see and THEN run their mouths. Right now it seems like sour grapes. The Republicans get to choose because the Republicans won. When the Dems run I expect the same theatrics. The winners get to make the choices, and its that simple and there isn't anything anybody can do about it. The members of the Senate will vote and their vote will reflect their belief in voting in such a way that they can keep their jobs (except for those retiring) This is the way it works, how its always worked, and will continue to work.

Top
#307354 - 07/10/18 07:18 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: jgw]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
Originally Posted By: jgw
I find it interesting that it would seem that the Supremes are somehow contaminated and guilty before they have really done something to show their evil ways. So far they seem to have ruled in favor of the law and not in favor of politics.
Respectfully, jgw, I don't know whether that is sarcasm, or you're returning from another planet. Fortunately, in this case, the evil ways of Kavanaugh have been on display for decades. That's why he has been selected by the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation.

Some highlights: immigrants don't have rights; the federal government can prevent abortions by my minors in custody; Where Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh stands on key issues - CNN.
Quote:
"the government has permissible interests in favoring fetal life, protecting the best interests of a minor, and refraining from facilitating abortion." ... Claiming it was "a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in US government detention to obtain immediate abortion on demand."
. Gay rights? Don't exist; government regulation of business?extremely limited. 'Religious liberty" Trump's "civil rights". Second Amendment supremacy... He's A VERY known quantity.

And where were you when Merrick Garland's seat was stolen? PLEASE tell me you are being sarcastic.

Top
#307355 - 07/10/18 07:39 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline


Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 13267
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer


And where were you when Merrick Garland's seat was stolen?


The thing that chaps my ass the worst about Garland is the fact that McConnell's team is smugly saying that what they did was legal.
Yeah, it sure was, until he pirouetted from "We do not intend to process a nomination until after the election" to "If Hillary wins, we refuse to process any nominations from her either - - Because: Hillz!"

That's maybe the most egregious case of moving the goalposts I've ever witnessed.

So, is THAT STILL legal? Yeah, it probably is.
So is adding another couple of seats to the SCOTUS and then passing a law that criminalizes frivolous actions designed to prevent a sitting president from nominating a justice without good cause - CONSTITUTIONAL cause.

And for all who wring their hands about the Repubs doing a retaliatory add of a couple of seats in response if they get back in power, don't count on it happening.
For the record, I normally would not be in favor of adding seats however this is a BREAK GLASS IN EMERGENCY situation. We are in uncharted territory with a political party gone full rogue, full foaming at the mouth cult status.

Someone needs to turn the hose on these wild-eyed American mullahs and teach them a lesson.
_________________________
"He wakes up in the morning, ****s all over Twitter, ****s all over us, ****s all over his staff, then hits golf balls."
---Congressman Peter King

Top
#307356 - 07/10/18 07:57 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
By the way, my friend, it is NOT "the way it has always worked." Have you read my previous posts on the subject? Confirmations for the sitting Supreme Court justices were not nearly as partisan as Judge Gorsuch’s. Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch are extremists, and everyone knew that going in.

Top
#307417 - 07/13/18 08:40 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
chunkstyle Offline
journeyman

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 965
At least this latest appointment will be bipartisan...

Centrists for the win!

Top
#308596 - 09/22/18 02:52 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: chunkstyle]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
If Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed, there is no hope for the Supreme Court as an institution.

Top
#308601 - 09/22/18 08:05 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 16203
I'm going to elaborate on my last post: Brett Kavanaugh was not qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice before disclosure of his 1982 sexual assault, but the process to install him anyway is so abusive it is damaging all three branches of government.

First, Trump, through the "Federalist Society", removed all pretense of a "fair"/rational nominee - making it explicitly partisan and ideological and even providing the litmus test he is using. The Federalist Society is a shockingly regressive cabal of anti-Constitutional, anti-democratic diehards. This is, sadly, not close to an exaggeration. What Is The Federalist Society And How Does It Affect Supreme Court Picks? - npr. Kavanaugh is its poster child. That endorsement alone makes him unqualified, but it doesn't end there.

The Senate, under the influence of Mitch McConnell (who makes Machiavelli seem an amateur), has eviscerated the norms of behavior that once made it the rational brother in Congress, and it has been with the goal of capturing the judiciary. McConnell's foes (and even allies) have underestimated his craven psychopathy (a mental disorder in which an individual manifests amoral and antisocial behavior, lack of ability to love or establish meaningful personal relationships, extreme egocentricity, failure to learn from experience, etc.). He cares about nothing but personal power. As a result, committees are controlled by him, and rules and norms are ignored (like fairness, due process, constitutionality, and traditions). The Judiciary Committee's behavior is a stark example. I cannot emphasize enough how sick McConnell really is.

Finally, the judiciary, and especially the Supreme Court, has been generationally tainted by ideological purists who are unrepresentative of the population, and do not have the best interests of the people in mind. The damage to justice is deep, and potentially incurable.

Top
#308605 - 09/22/18 09:09 PM Re: The End of the Independent Judiciary [Re: NW Ponderer]
jgw Online   content
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 2097
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
The supremes have tipped in one direction or another before and we all seemed to survive it. Hopefully we can do it again. I do, however, admire the Democrats for what they have accompished with this one. Even if Kavanaugh gets on the court its going to cost the Republicans bigtime. I think, to seal the deal, that Christine Blasey Ford does Sunday politics. If she does I am assuming that she is capable, well spoken and has at it.

I would really prefer that Kavanaugh does not get on but I think he will. This is because the Dems have been asleep for a long time and the Republicans were able to run roughshod over everything from voting to their wetdreams. I REALLY hope the Dems will sweep it this time around and then, sticking to their guns, stick it to the right with vigor - no more Mr. Nice guy. I can still remember, when Obama took over, how he spent all that time trying to get the Republicans on board and actually join in. He failed, basically because of the Republican system of "my way or the highway" instituted by Newt Gingrich. Republicans tend to be very greedy, to the point where they have decided, publicly and out loud, that they will no longer be willing to discuss ANYTHING with the opposition, never to give an inch, and be willing to do the "all or nothing" thing. They were able to do this because the Dems, I think, simply could not believe it. I betcha they do now!

Hopefully, I think we can do better?

Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 35 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TrentonP, Nosf50, erumonej, Jensen Breck, Albertapkr
6248 Registered Users
A2