so judicial activism is OKAY when it serves the cause of regression?
datasuspect
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:11 PM
Original message |
so judicial activism is OKAY when it serves the cause of regression? |
|
so we can turn back the clock on the case that pretty much launched the civil rights movement?
reinstate price fixing?
that's okay, i wasn't using those rights anyway.
|
quinnox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:13 PM
Response to Original message |
|
it is only called judicial activism when it's the liberal justices doing it, when its the conservatives then its "following the rule of law" or some other spin they will come up with
|
datasuspect
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. i know i shouldn't be floored, but i am |
|
they essentially said a hearty "fuck you" to one of the cornerstone cases of the american civil rights movement.
|
hatrack
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:15 PM
Response to Original message |
3. But The Powder! It's DRY! Really, really REALLY dry! |
|
Surely that's worth something!
|
ellenfl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:16 PM
Response to Original message |
4. every man, woman and child on this forum |
|
should write an ltte (or more) to their local paper decrying this judicial activism. i will do so tonight.
ellen fl
|
TechBear_Seattle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:17 PM
Response to Original message |
|
An "activist judge" is an activist judge only if the judge makes a ruling that pisses off the right. Otherwise, the judge is a true American and patriot.
|
BlooInBloo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:18 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Segregation NOW, Segegation TOMORRAH, Segregation FOREVAH! |
|
Guess he knew what he was talking about.
|
datasuspect
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. yeah, only an idiot can pretend not to see the calamity that decision entails |
|
a historically ignorant moron could only feel okay with it.
|
malaise
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:34 PM
Response to Original message |
datasuspect
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. that almost sounds trite |
|
but since i'm not familiar with you as a poster, i'll take it at face value.
but do you really see a scenario where people who have appropriated that much power willingly give it up?
|
malaise
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. The people will take back power |
|
It happened before and it will happen again. People are fed up.
|
CrispyQ
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
12. A few months ago my husband casually made the comment |
|
that he doesn't think there will be elections in'08. I scoffed.
Now, I'm not so sure.
|
sandnsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-28-07 03:36 PM
Response to Original message |
10. "does not compel our continued adherence" |
|
Those are the chilling words folks. That's what they said when they overturned 90+ years of antitrust precedence. Just because something has been law in the past, that "does not compel our continued adherence".
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu May 16th 2024, 01:59 PM
Response to Original message |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.