Tag: Supreme Court
Darwin’s legal legacy: Justice O.W. Holmes
This diabolical idea of systematically disenfranchising Christians’ constitutional rights and belittling America’s original Judeo-Christian worldview isn’t unique to professor Tribe nor to history, but in modern times these ideas have a historical link to one of the greatest icons of liberal and progressive jurisprudence – Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.
Simplistic David Souter
Law professors John McGinnis and Michael Rappaport in a Wall Street Journal article offer the reader a brilliant retort to Justice Souter’s liberal “living Constitution” jurisprudence, wherein the judge makes up the Constitution as he goes along based on his own personal policy preferences instead of relying on the plain meaning of the document, which is the original intent of the framers.
Kagan: HELL NO!!!
There are not enough Republicans in the Senate to block this nomination. Worse yet, they lack the resolve required, they are caving in. We have no recourse except to rise up and raise Hell. We must send a clear message to our Senators: Kagan is not fit to sit on the court: your vote for this nomination guarantees my vote against you in the next election cycle.
The singular Supreme Court qualification
Has the man never heard of the separation-of-powers doctrine and judicial restraint? President Obama believes that a judge must be an agent for social change, a super-legislator, an unelected dictator. That’s diametrical to what the framers believed. Jefferson said, “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”
Devolving standards of indecency
One of the holiest scriptures of the totalitarian religion of liberalism is the legal aphorism, “evolving standards of decency.” For decades progressives, Democrat legislators, activist judges and humanist law academics have proclaimed their spiritual devotion to this sacred verse of the so-called “Living Constitution” doctrine. That ubiquitous phrase sounds so clinical, so egalitarian, so nice and caring, which belies its surreptitious meaning and evil intent in American law over the past 100 years.
In the Matter of the Qualifications of Judge Sonia Sotomayor
Sotomayor has also repeatedly engaged in deception during her sworn testimony before the Senate this week, in misrepresenting her repeated racist and unethical statements. All the training in the world from David Axelrod, et al., couldn’t help her there. What has saved her, however, has been the cowardice of the Living Dead Party.
SCOTUS gets one right – but …
If it has been 61 years, it has been a day – 61 years since the Supreme Court of the United States enshrined into constitutional law and into society the judge-created doctrine “separation of church and state” in the landmark case McCollum v. Board of Education (1948). American law, politics, culture and society haven’t been the same since.
Grandmotherly Ginsburg: Stalwart of the fringe
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the second woman to sit on the high court has recently been admitted to the hospital as a precaution for early stages of pancreatic cancer treatment. This started a media frenzy of speculation about whom Obama would choose as his first appointment to the Supreme Court. Analyzing the media rumor about Ginsburg, conservative intellectual and radio host Michael Savage this week posted on his website an interesting article on Justice Ginsburg by Edward Whelar titled, “The Ginsburg Record and Standard.”
Recent Comments