Free Republic

Leo Donofrio filed a solid lawsuit. Hard to get behind Berg, his was not a good lawsuit. This, OTOH, is. Do I think it should be pursued, yes? Do I believe Obama was born in Hawaii? Probably. Is there something on Obama's birth certificate he does not want us to see. Foe shizzle. Should a President of the United States have to present his vault copy to take office? Absolutely. I don't know what is on the birth certificate- I do know Obama does not want us to see it. But with Obama - there is no law. It's Alinsky...

Less than a week before its October term is set to begin, the US Supreme Court became a spectacle of sound and fury on Wednesday over a landmark decision handed down three months ago declaring that the death penalty for child rapists is cruel and unusual punishment. At issue was whether the high court would revisit the landmark 5-to-4 decision after revelations last summer that contradicted the majority justices' conclusion that a "national consensus" had emerged against the death penalty for the rape of a child. The June 25 decision said only six states had laws authorizing capital punishment for...

The execution of José Ernesto Medellín Rojas by the state of Texas is a violation of international law, said Amnesty International today. "It undermines the authority of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which had ruled in favour of a stay of execution."

Afghanis Get It, Too Bad Anti-Gun Elitists Don’t: NRA To Target Chicago + Neighboring Suburban Hand Gun Bans, After Supreme Court Ruling Commentary by Bill Zettler * According to the Associated Press, June 27, 2008, "The number of civilians killed in fighting between insurgents and security forces in Afghanistan has soared by two-thirds in the first half of this year, to almost 700 people, a senior U.N. official said Sunday." We have all seen pictures on TV of Afghan citizens walking the streets with AK-47's draped over their shoulders. And who can forget the Afghan weddings where hundreds of shots...

Just a theory, but so tantalizing that it warrants a post all its own....

The Supreme Court's Boumediene v. Bush used the U.S. Constitution to find extraordinary rights for the very same people trying to destroy that Constitution. In doing so, the five liberal members of the U.S. Supreme Court taped a "KICK ME!" signs to their own backs. But unlike other Kick Me Liberals, in the Supreme Court's case, they've also taped that sign onto the backs of 300 million of their countrymen. A few examples of Kick Me Liberals. United States Supreme Court Incredibly, these five Justices [the Court's liberal bloc of Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen...

I get philsophical sometimes when I go running and have time to think outside the house and workplace... A question to all my fellow Freepers... During a joint session of Congress, could we simutaneously drug test all of our elected Federal representatives/Senators, judges and Excutive Branch employees? Could we have one same-sex military person stand there while Mr. Levin, Mrs. Ginsberg, Mr. Bush or Mr. Lott gives a urine sample, unannounced? If private sector, local, state and Federal employees are required to submit to a drug test, can one be done to the lawmakers? Just a ponderance...

As most of you will know, the U.S. Supreme Court held oral argument in District of Columbia v. Heller, the D.C. gun ban case. An extremely important Second Amendment case; in fact, the first of its kind in generations (about 70 years). The transcript of the argument is available here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1987832/posts But what is truly interesting, is to see the listing of amicus: that is, third parties who have submitted "friend of the court" briefs, advocating one side or the other of the issue. Following is the list. It is arranged first according to those who support the ban -...

2008-01-12) On Friday the Bush administration filed an amicus asking the Supreme Court to remand the Parker case (“DC gun law case”) back to the District of Columbia to come up with a ‘softer standard of review’ on what constitutes reasonable gun regulations. In doing so, Bush strikes a major blow against all Americans in the on-going struggle over the scope of individual rights. Filed through the Department of Justice (DOJ), the administration’s stated purpose is to protect a host of federal laws that restrict private ownership of firearms. DOJ argues in its brief that the same reasoning which allowed...

It's been 68 years since the U.S. Supreme Court examined the right to keep and bear arms secured by the Second Amendment. It's been 31 years since the District of Columbia enacted its feckless ban on all functional firearms in the capital. It's been eight months since the second most important court in the country, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, declared the D.C. ban...unconstitutional. The obvious incongruity of those three events could be resolved soon. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court decided to review the circuit court's blockbuster opinion in Parker v. District of Columbia,...

As Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has firmed up her lead in the Democratic presidential race, speculation about her potential running mate is rising -- among Republicans! "Absolutely," said former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani when asked during a recent interview if he thinks Clinton will be nominated. "I believe she will be the nominee and Sen. [Barack] Obama will be the vice presidential nominee." Yes, some people already are talking about Clinton as though she were the nominee, even before a single Democratic primary or caucus voter has had a chance to weigh in. As Clinton leads by as much...

RUSH: We're truly honored today, ladies and gentlemen, to have with us at our microphones Associate Justice of the US Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas. His new book is out today, My Grandfather's Son. It is a powerful, motivational, inspirational memoir, and I'm so happy that you're doing all of this, Mr. Justice Thomas, because, as a member of the court, you can't say much other than what you write. It's the protocol -- and I have so long wanted people to get to know the man that I know and that so many people who know you know, because you're...

The District today asked the Supreme Court to uphold the city's ban on private ownership of handguns, saying the appeals court decision that overturned the law "drastically departs from the mainstream of American jurisprudence." Most legal experts believe the court will accept the case, which could lead to a historic decision next year on whether the ambiguously worded Second Amendment to the Constitution protects private gun ownership or only imparts a civic right related to maintaining state militias. The District argues in its petition for review that its law--one of the toughest handgun bans in the nation--should be upheld regardless...

The central meaning of the Second Amendment has long been settled in the courts. The last time the Supreme Court directly addressed the provision -- which reads, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" -- was in 1939, in a case called United States v. Miller. The court said that the Second Amendment's "obvious purpose" is to ensure the effectiveness and continuation of state military forces (the militia mentioned in the amendment), not to provide a private right to own...

When one is trying to advance a case in court, you have to have a plantiff with a good image. Lawyers at the NAACP achieved a major victory when the Warren Supreme Court came down with the Brown vs. Board of Education ruling. Now there were opportunities to use federal judicial power to overrule state segregation laws through lawsuits. In 1955 a number of people defied bus segregation in Montgomery, Alabama. But until seamstress and local member Rosa Parks came along, the NAACP stayed out of court. Earlier cases involved people who had bad reputations or who might break under...

Racial integration in the early part of the last century was very much a personal moral decision that involved no rules or laws to force it. If one chose to be in the company of other races it was a personal decision because legally speaking segregation was the "law of the land" at least in the mind of those who accept "stare indecisis" as their principle. When one chose to integrate it was very much a personal moral decision with laws not coming into play. Ronald Reagan related a story in his writings of his mother bringing a black basketball...

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. made it clear as he began taking questions at yesterday's National Italian American Foundation luncheon that he couldn't reveal any of the Supreme Court's forthcoming opinions. But did he at least give a hint? Two of the court's biggest remaining cases focus on the First Amendment, and while Alito didn't mention either, he did make it clear that any restrictions on speech face a high hurdle with him. "I'm a very strong believer in the First Amendment and the right of people to speak and to write," Alito said in response to a question of...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday it would decide whether President George W. Bush had the authority to direct a state court to comply with an international tribunal's ruling in the case of a Mexican on death row in Texas. The justices agreed to review a decision by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that concluded Bush had exceeded his constitutional authority by intruding into the independent powers of the judiciary. The case involved Jose Medellin, who was denied the right to meet with a consular officer from Mexico after his arrest for murder. The World...

Next big test of power to seize property? The US Supreme Court will examine whether a private company can demand payment in exchange for not seizing private property. By Warren Richey | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor Bart Didden wanted to put a CVS pharmacy on his property in Port Chester, N.Y. He even obtained approvals from the local planning board. But because a portion of the CVS site was in a blighted redevelopment zone, Mr. Didden was told that planning board approval wasn't enough. He'd have to reach an understanding with a private company that had been...

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal Monday by evangelical Christian students and their parents who said a Contra Costa County school district engaged in unconstitutional religious indoctrination when it taught students about Islam by having them recite language from prayers.

WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court decisions that are "so clearly at variance with the national will" should be overridden by the other branches of government, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The House, citing the nation's religious origins, voted Wednesday to protect the Pledge of Allegiance from federal judges who might try to stop schoolchildren and others from reciting it because of the phrase "under God." The legislation, a priority of social conservatives, passed 260-167. It now goes to the Senate where its future is uncertain. "We should not and cannot rewrite history to ignore our spiritual heritage," said Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn. "It surrounds us. It cries out for our country to honor God."

WASHINGTON, July 1, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- The Supreme Court has temporarily halted U.S. President George W. Bush's plans to convene special military courts to try the Guantanamo Bay detainees. RFE/RL Washington correspondent Heather Maher talked to a U.S. defense expert who believes this ruling was wrong, and that the special courts are essential to winning the war on terror. Frank Gaffney heads the Washington-based Center for Security Policy and was assistant secretary of defense for international security policy in the Reagan administration. He says a new kind of "totalitarian ideology" -- what he calls "Islamofacism" -- is "bent on our...

U.S. Supreme Court SMITH v. MARYLAND, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) 442 U.S. 735 SMITH v. MARYLAND. CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No. 78-5374. Argued March 28, 1979. Decided June 20, 1979. The telephone company, at police request, installed at its central offices a pen register to record the numbers dialed from the telephone at petitioner's home. Prior to his robbery trial, petitioner moved to suppress "all fruits derived from" the pen register. The Maryland trial court denied this motion, holding that the warrantless installation of the pen register did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Petitioner was convicted,...

Several Democrats Monday, including the reliable Sen. Edward Kennedy, seemed on the verge of making an even worse tactical error. They suggested that Alito's respect for executive branch prerogatives would make him too ready to approve wiretapping and other surveillance of terrorists. That shows a deep misreading of U.S. opinion. Not only do most polls show that a small plurality of Americans favors wiretapping as a tool against terrorism, but even those against do not consider it a wildly extreme position. When the Democrats campaign against Alito on those grounds, they reinforce the public view of themselves as weak on...

"Stare decisis" in upholding U.S. Supreme Court decisions is something the liberals belive in only when it suits their purposes.

CHICAGO, Nov. 30 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court's decision this week to review a lower-court decision involving eBay and an injunction for patent infringement revives the patent agenda pushed earlier this year by the software industry, a reform program that failed to make any headway through the Congress, legal experts tell United Press International's The Web. The case, eBay vs. MercExchange, comes from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court had held that, barring exceptional circumstances, a district court should issue a permanent injunction after finding that a patent was infringed. By Gene Koprowski

Since Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement from the Supreme Court in July, members of the Democratic left have been itching to pummel a Republican nominee on abortion. Chief Justice John Roberts didn't fit the bill, since he had never made any controversial statements about Roe v. Wade -- or anything else for that matter. Judge Samuel Alito is a different matter, however. In a 1985 document released on Nov. 15, Alito told the Reagan administration that he would be proud to argue "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion." This revelation produced gasps of outrage among Senate...

Accepting the appeal of a Michigan developer who has become a hero to the property-rights movement, the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday said it will decide whether the federal government has the authority to regulate wetlands miles away from a river or other waterway. The justices will decide whether John Rapanos, a grandfather in his 70s, was within his rights when he filled in wetlands on his property without a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Rapanos had hoped to build a shopping center on his land. They must decide whether to sustain $13 million in civil fines...

The thread through GOP Supreme Court Disappointments, Successes and Bush’s Supreme Court Nominations In the last 55 years, GOP presidents and the voters that elected them have been disappointed to a lesser or greater extent in several of the US Supreme Justices the GOP presidents have nominated. Some of the more prominent disappointment have been Warren, Blackmun, Stevens, O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter. These Justices were appointed by every GOP president starting with Eisenhower who nominated Warren, Nixon who nominated Blackmun, Ford who nominated Stevens, Reagan who nominated Kennedy and O’Connor through George H.W. Bush who nominated Souter. Now put yourself...

Today, with the president who appointed him in attendance, the 17th chief justice of the United States will robe and take his high seat as the first among nine equals. John G. Roberts Jr. is expected to preserve the whimsical stripes on his robe introduced by his mentor, the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist. He will honor traditions new and old. But yesterday, he and President Bush, along with other justices, judges and dignitaries, participated in a tradition older still.

Hypocrisy stands at the pinnacle of the sins that liberals most disdain. So it's fair game to compare the free ride they gave to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with their searching the archives to pillory every word ever written by Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. Liberal commentators and U.S. senators, who are salivating at the upcoming interrogation of Roberts, never asked Ginsburg about her extremist views spelled out in her lengthy paper trail. The senators didn't have to do much research; I made it easy for them by publishing her words in my July 1993 Phyllis Schlafly...

WASHINGTON - Democrats and liberal special interest groups had been primed for a fight over President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court, expecting it would prove the Republican party was moving to the extreme right. Instead, Bush gave them Judge John G. Roberts Jr. He is smart, graduating from Harvard in three years. He is well-qualified, arguing 39 cases before the Supreme Court. He is well-liked, winning over both sides in his legal career. Roberts, a federal judge on the Washington, D.C., court of appeals, is expected to be confirmed by the Senate this fall - which leaves Democrats a...

For those not news junkies, the overwhelming majority, SCOTUS is the acronym for Supreme Court of the United States. As to getting excited about the coming debate over the latest appointment to this bench, most people's reaction is SCOTUS shmotis. I'm what some partisans of absolutist positions might call wishy-washy on their issues. I prefer to call my attitude rooted in absolute principles and then seeking their practical application. To just take three of the hottest buttons: Abortion is not an absolute "right." It is the taking of a life. I agree with my traditional Jewish laws that allow it...

Since U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor resigned July 1, speculation has focused on who would be President Bush's first nominee to the high court. Would it be another woman or a Hispanic? Would it be a hard-line, "movement" conservative or a moderate, nonideological figure? With Bush's nomination of Judge John G. Roberts Jr., the answer is known: none of the above. Roberts, as one White House counsel put it, has credentials that jump off the page. No fictional, idealized résumé could be more glowing: top of his high school class and football team captain; graduation with honors from...

GRADE ISSUES A+..Extremely Pro-Gay -...A Decision Against Gay Rights A...Very Pro-Gay +...A Decision For Gay Rights B...Pro-Gay ?...No Decision C...Average I...Ineligible D...Anti-Gay F...Very Anti-Gay F-..Extremely Anti-Gay ?...No DecisionsMICHIGAN SUPREME COURT HOMOSEXUAL ISSUES 1) Linda Mack v. The City of Detroit, July 31, 2002 (Discrimination) This decision ruled that a former Detroit police lieutenant cannot sue the city over what she says is antigay discrimination. The court said the city is protected from the lawsuit under governmental immunity. The decision reversed a 2000 court of appeals ruling. Linda Mack sued Detroit in Wayne County circuit court in 1999, saying she...

I Thought We Won The Revolution By Kevin Fobbs As our nation leads up to our celebration of its birth, we seriously have to wonder whether or not we will have anything left of our Constitution to truly celebrate. After the "Kelo vs. City of London" decision handed down last week, where the U.S. Supreme Court performed a seeming abrupt about face on the 5th Amendment and more importantly on America, when will the Constitution be returned to the American people? The U.S. Supreme Court's surgical disembodiment of the Fifth Amendment was, not a quick and deliberate action. Rather, it...

Ten Commandments or Ten Opinions? Pick the former unless you want to wade through nearly 150 pages of dense US Supreme Court legal jargon explaining why a Kentucky courthouse may or may not keep a display of the Ten Commandments ("may not" carried the day, by a 5/4 vote of the justices) and why a Texas statehouse may or may not keep its display of the Ten Commandments ("may" carried the day here, by a different 5/4 vote). That's right. It took the U.S. Supreme Court ten opinions and nearly 150 pages in total to micromanage two state displays of...

Editorial The Limits of Property Rights Published: June 24, 2005 The Supreme Court's ruling yesterday that the economically troubled city of New London, Conn., can use its power of eminent domain to spur development was a welcome vindication of cities' ability to act in the public interest. It also is a setback to the "property rights" movement, which is trying to block government from imposing reasonable zoning and environmental regulations. Still, the dissenters provided a useful reminder that eminent domain must not be used for purely private gain.

good news! these 5 u.s. supreme court justices will contribute to a gop win in 2008. people are energized--middle class and even the poor. elderly home owners are fearful that their property will be grabbed from them, and they'll be out on the street, so to speak. let's thank the 5 u.s. supreme court justices that brought the property rights issue into focus. because of this, now many people, democrat and republican, will be suspicious of the left. these people will vote in 2008. let's hope the gop chooses a viable candidate.

I just heard on WABC radio news that the candidates that President Bush is considering as U.S. Supreme Court nominees are John Roberts, J. Michael Luttig and possibly Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. Alberto Gonzeles is not pro-life, which worries me.

The filibuster isn't a noble institution, it's a tactic - and one with a checkered past, at that. Liberals decried it in the 1960s when segregationist Southern Democrats used it to thwart the will of the majority to block civil rights legislation. But at least that tawdry application of the filibuster was consistent with its purpose in the United States Senate as a procedure to force legislative compromise.

I have to give Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist credit for trying. It’s not easy to stand before the American people and admit that after years of winning elections, you’re still the party of losers. When Dr. Frist addressed the Head of the Senate and announced his acceptance of a compromise on filibusters, he tried really hard to point out the pluses and minuses of the compromise. In a pitiful gesture, Frist even managed a smile, but he looked weak and dejected. By contrast, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid appeared energetic and relieved, as if he’d just returned from a...

Nebraska is back in the title hunt for most outrageous judicial opinion, this time on Federal Judge Joe Bataillon’s Court decision striking down the Nebraska Defense of Marriage constitutional amendment. The 30% or so of Nebraskans who opposed the amendment five years ago now feel vindicated because their own lawsuit proved their point, hardly an unbiased evaluation of the original law. Volokh Conspiracy sees this decision, while wildly off base, as the poisoned fruit of the 1996 US Supreme Court decision Romer v. Evans {ruling Colorado State Constitutional amendment that prohibited municipalities from enacting anti-discrimination laws to protect sexual orientation....

The Supreme Court said Monday it will consider whether colleges and universities may bar military recruiters from their campuses without fear of losing federal funds. the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, invalidated a 1994 federal law requiring law schools to give the military full access or lose their federal funding. The appeals court ruled the law infringed on law schools' free speech rights. the 3rd Circuit cited a 2000 Supreme Court ruling that allowed the Boy Scouts to exclude gay scoutmasters. Just as the Scouts have a right to exclude gays based on a First Amendment right of...

What do most members of the Democratic National Committee, the American Bar Association and the American Civil Liberties Union have in common? They hate the Constitution of the United States of America. Of course, people in each group have somewhat different reasons for hating that document. Democrat party leaders hate it because it forces people with minority opinions like themselves to abide by rules which reflect the will of the majority. ABA law practitioners hate it because it does not permit them to make legal decisions based upon their political ideologies. Members of the ACLU hate it because they are...

The Supreme Court's history on right-to-die cases is pretty thin. It ruled in 1990 that a terminally ill person has a right to refuse life-sustaining treatment. And next term it plans to consider whether the federal government can prosecute doctors who help ill patients die. ... Terri Schiavo's case offers a number of legal questions for the Court to consider.... Among them is whether she actually requested that artificial means not be used to keep her alive and whether state or federal courts should be the venue to determine her fate. ... An emergency filing to the high court that...

<p>Those first words of the Bill of Rights seem straightforward enough, until you get to the last three: "establishment of religion."</p> <p>What does that mean?</p> <p>In brief, it bars government from endorsing a particular religion, and from colonial times it has been recognized as the principle of the separation of church and state.</p>

A rare and tragic family law challenge in the U.S. Supreme Court will draw the justices this month into the serious nationwide problem of domestic violence and the continuing difficulty of enforcement of one of the most important weapons against that violence -- protection orders. In Town of Castle Rock, Colorado v. Gonzales, No. 04-728, the high court will consider whether a civil rights remedy is available to domestic violence victims whose pleas to enforce protection orders go unheeded by local police departments. "People feel very strongly that the system is not working for women," said Lorelie S. Masters of...

Cecil B. DeMille's 'Ten Commandments' went from film to stone By BRUCE WESTBROOK Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Master showman Cecil B. DeMille couldn't have planned it better. A peerless self-promoter, the late Ten Commandments director might see the battle being waged in the U.S. Supreme Court as the ultimate publicity stunt — as well as a moral crusade. DeMille actually helped establish the battleground. He played a role in getting the granite replica of the Commandments placed outside the Texas Capitol. He skillfully avoided footing the bill for the tablets, leaving that to the Fraternal Order of Eagles. The service...