Posted on 06/27/2022 5:31:37 AM PDT by MtnClimber
s reactions from Friday’s landmark Supreme Court ruling continue to pour in, it has become evident that many conservatives have yet to realize that the good news resulting from the decision—which overturned Roe v. Wade and ended the nearly 50-year recognition of abortion as a constitutional right—goes far beyond the pro-life movement and protection of the unborn.
As monumental as the Dobbs decision is for unborn children and pro-life activists who have spent decades tirelessly working to overrule Roe and defend the right to life, Dobbs demonstrates that, for the first time in a generation, the Supreme Court is not controlled by justices who are chiefly concerned with their public image and reputation among left-wing journalists and mainstream media operatives. Ultimately, the Alito majority in Dobbs indicates that, despite his wishes, Chief Justice John Roberts’ efforts to alter the post-Roe majority and Taneyize the High Court have fallen flat—and that at long last, media control of American politics could very well be coming to an end.
As we have stated before, Roberts’ longstanding campaign to neglect the plain words of the Constitution and jeopardize the common good in favor of vague concepts like “fluidity in the middle” and sociopolitical “stability” on the Court have posed a unique series of threats to the American constitutional order and institutional legitimacy of the Court. A May 18th article—“Creeping Taneyism at the High Court: Can Roberts Alter Alito?”—compares Roberts to former Chief Justice Roger Taney, who authored the notorious 1857 Dred Scott decision (which held that black Americans were property while barring them from U.S. citizenship) in an attempt to maintain social and political harmony. The article outlines the ways in which Roberts has abandoned his previously stated constitutionalist principles, which were ultimately responsible for elevating him to the Court in 2005. (Others have since picked up on the Taneyist comparison—most notably The Federalist, which compared the pro-abortion Democrats of today to the pro-slavery Democrats of the 19th century, who held that black Americans possess no rights.)
Even more startling, though, is the description of Roberts as a historical example of an era—one that the Dobbs decision shows is at last fading—when the acts of public officials were frequently controlled by how they thought they might be perceived by a handful of newspapers and broadcast networks.....
It's good to hear your sage wisdom as usual, thank you.
The Coach was 6/3 in our favor.
Bannon says 6 or 7 are coming down today.
Is it true the Harvard/A.A. case has been pushed back to the fall? Thanks in advance.
LS: Yes. I’m almost sure it was Sotomayor’s clerk ...
Matt Wolking spotted the following linkage and posted a Twitter Tweet about it on May 2:
"A person called Amit Jain clerks for Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. As a Yale student, Jain blasted Yale for supporting Brett Kavanaugh's nomination. Jain was quoted in a 2017 Politico piece by Josh Gerstein. Today, Gerstein published the draft SCOTUS opinion on Roe."
If you read Amit Jain's "micro biography," it reads like a recipe for "How To Turn A Bright, Malleable Immigrant From India Into a Left-Wing Lunatic." As a law student, he clerked for various "projects" that are near and dear to the shriveled hearts of the socialist left: eliminating cash bonds for violent felons, etc.
I’ve been doing some research on Amit Jain. He appears to be the type of guy who just can’t keep his mouth shut when he perceives some type of “injustice” (i.e., the agenda of the lunatic left-wing fringe is getting blocked in some way).
He writes long, single spaced letters to state legislatures whenever they’re thinking about passing some new law that he sees as an “injustice.”
Before going to law school, he was a middle school math teacher in Boston. (I’m sure the Boston teachers’ union was very influential during this formative period.)
As a law student at Yale, he represented teenage gang members in the New Haven juvenile courts through Yale’s Juvenile Justice Clinic; taught constitutional law to high school students in New Haven (always with a high-velocity left-wing spin); and interned with the Adolescent Defense Project at the Bronx Defenders (which represents teenage gang members).
Prior to joining The Bronx Defenders, he clerked for Judge Diana Gribbon Motz (a Bill Clinton nominee) on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In law school, Amit was also a member of the Worker and Immigrant Rights Advocacy Clinic (which tries to prevent the deportation of illegal immigrants), and the Housing Clinic (which tries to prevent the eviction of illegal immigrants when they don’t pay their rent).
Notice a pattern here?
Roberts was a LOSER a LONG TIME before this.
I have to go spend a few days in the CA Bay Area soon. I will canoe the streets on waves of tears.
I wonder, sometimes, why it is so difficult for these justices to determine whether something is constitutional or not. The question before SCOTUS was whether abortion was enumerated as a right in the Constitution.
Take fifteen minutes, maybe half an hour to actually read the Constitution - then they’ll have their easy answer . . .
“Since 2004, the U.S. has lost more than 2,000 newspapers”
Unfortunate, but it’s due largely to the cheapness of TV and internet news broadcasting as compared to printing and delivering paper.
Someone who worked for a TV station said local TV news was dying because of declining viewership. The half-hour local news shows around here are too long — babbling and dramatization in the weather forcasts, repetitions of news that’s covered national broadcasts, titillating but not local news. Not to mention the woke ingredients that are mixed in.
Gets better: the Fifth Circuit will hear Biteme’s appeal on the DACA case (was struck down when Trump did it, but only for “administrative” reasons; then a judge struck it down, and Biteme appealed).
The panel is three very solid conservatives, one a Trump pick to the 5th, another a Thomas clerk, and the third was filibustered by SpewMore til the 2005 “Gang of 14” deal.
Zen Master, my court guy, says “DACA is dead!”
if so, they did a piss poor job of it.
I may have misunderstood, but I thought you said there might be a major decision rolling back affirmative action precedent.
In terms of broad ramifications in U.S. law, that would be huge.
Yes, this is coming. Apparently it got pushed back to the fall. But it’s coming. Friday expect the EPA decision.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.