Saddam Captured; O’Connor Still on the Loose

Special to FreeRepublic ^ | 16 December 2003 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[Congressman Billybob]

As usual, I'm posting this for FreeRepublic folks as soon as it is ready, rather than waiting for the official posting date.

Lemme know what you think. Both subjects are front burner ones on FreeRepublic.

[Sabertooth]

Don't quit your day job.

[Not now, Not ever!]

Bump, bttt, Dang it! found it to late to read tonight, bookmark for Monday, Thanks John for what you do.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks!

Have a borrowed toon here:

[Eva]

bump for tomorrow morning

[HP8753]

It wrote in Sweezy v. New Hampshire that freedom of speech was the most important right because the defense of all other rights depended on that. IMHO.It got that part wrong.The 2nd Amendment is the cornerstone that protects all the other rights.

[Lancey Howard]

Terrific analysis.

A few questions: Does O'Connor still have full control of her mental faculties? (I am wondering if she has gone dotty.) How much does her staff have to do with her rulings, and do you know if they are liberal mice (I thought I read something to that effect here on FR not long ago). I just wonder if her staff tells her how to rule and then provides the ammo for her "opinions". And finally, it seems that O'Connor has made a couple of other uncharacteristic rulings lately (the go-ahead, have-sex-with-children-and-goats-in-the-privacy-of-your-own-bedroom ruling is an example); is there a guilt thing going on here from the 2000 Presidential election rulings? Is O'Connor trying to "balance" those rulings which favored the Republicans by throwing a few bones (albeit, dangerous bones) to the scumbags?

By the way, I agree that the other four votes to gut the first amendment were no surprise at all. You got any skinny on the health of those disgraceful scumbags or if any of them are thinking of throwing in the towel soon?

Thanks again for a great post.

Regards,
LH

[Looking for Diogenes]

The Framers gave us that Amendment in no uncertain terms, ?Congress shall make no law ... respecting freedom of speech.? They intended to give Congress no leeway in preventing criticism of itself. That barrier has now been breached.

That barrier was breached a long time ago, by the Alien and Sedition Acts. Of course, those were probably unconstitutional as well.

[Congressman Billybob]

The Alien and Sedition Laws were never tested in the Supreme Court. The Court declared almost a century and a half afterwards (in New York Times v. Sullivan) that the A&S laws "were clearly unconstitutional."

John / Billybob

[Congressman Billybob]

Every Justice has crackerjack clerks, very bright and looking to make a name for themselves. Since the Justices read some of their potential employees writings and also interview them, presumably they get ones who are in the same ballpark with themselves.

As for how much each Justice does, versus having staff do it, that's personal to each Justice. Though as they get older, Justices tend to leave more of the work to staff. However, all that is after the fact. Cases are actually decided in the Friday afternoon conferences at the end of the week in which the argument is held. Only the Justices are present for that conference.

I don't think the problem is that Justice O'Connor has gone potty. She's no pottier than any other Justice at this time. It is that she's gone round the bend in her jurisprudence. As for health, age and resignations, let's just say I expect to see three resignations within or at the end of this Term of the Court.

John / Billybob

[whenigettime]

I like the John Wayne quote:

“a fair trial, and a proper hanging.”


yes sir!

[July 4th]

same here.

[Congressman Billybob]

It's not either/or but both/and. The First Amendment is the day to day protection of our rights. The Second Amendment is the once in a lifetime when it really gets bad protection of our rights.

Not today, not in this Court, but they were when the Framers put the Bill of Rights together to complete the Constitution.

John / Billybob

[jla]

bttt...always look forward to, and enjoy, your articles, John.

[Lancey Howard]

As for health, age and resignations, let's just say I expect to see three resignations within or at the end of this Term of the Court.

Wow.
Thanks for your kind reply.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

...I expect to see three resignations within or at the end of this Term of the Court...

I halfway expect those would be Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas, given the current climate.

On the other hand, a few more rulings like CFR and there should be some forced retirements.

[jokar]

Bump

[AntiGuv]

...let's just say I expect to see three resignations within or at the end of this Term of the Court.

Three resignations in an election year? I'll believe it when I see it.

[Congressman Billybob]

Neither Scalia nor Thomas will retire. Expect it to be Rehnquist, O'Connor and Ginsburg -- all for health reasons (plus age).

John / Billybob

[King Black Robe]

BTTT