SCOTUS DECISION WATCH- Live Thread- 10am

Sun Times & AP ^ | June 27, 2005

[RobFromGa]

RULINGS ON MONDAY?

A look at the remaining cases of the Supreme Court's term:

TEN COMMANDMENTS: The constitutionality of Ten Commandments in public buildings and on government property, under the First Amendment's ban on an ''establishment'' of religion.

FILE SHARING: Whether the entertainment industry may sue technology manufacturers over consumers who use their products to steal music and movies online.

INTERNET ACCESS: A test of the tight control cable companies hold over high-speed Internet service in a case that will determine whether the industry must open up its lines to competitors.

DEATH PENALTY: A look at courts' flexibility to reopen cases, in an appeal that asks if an appeals court was wrong to order more study of a Tennessee Death Row inmate's claims.

RESTRAINING ORDERS: Whether police can be sued for how they enforce restraining orders.

[Preachin']

"I think the Democrats were saying similar things about Strom Thurmond for close to two decades! :)"

You don't happen to think that living to 100 years of age in the US Senate goes against the norm, do you?

[alessandrofiaschi]

That's my opinion too.

[lunarbicep]

I've gotta head out now, but I wanted to Thank You for starting this thread, Rob. It beats having to endure the talking heads on TV.

*BTW - I'd love to know your source for getting SCOTUS rulings so quickly

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[LizardQueen]

This has much greater, dangerous far-reaching implications than the Ten Commandments rulings.

I agree with you. This and the eminent domain decision make the 10 com ones relatively trivial by comparison. I wish people would focus on these more - will it really matter what's posted on the courthouse wall when our guns are taken away and we're evicted from our homes?

LQ

[RobFromGa]

My sources were:

http://www.scotusblog.com/movabletype/
and
http://www.foxnews.com

I would also highly recommend for the SCOTUS nomination battles hopefully ahead:

The Supreme Court Nomination Blog
http://www.sctnomination.com/blog/

[The Spirit Of Allegiance]

"Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist announced the second decision, finding no constitutional violation in the display of the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the state capitol building in Austin, Texas."

---

TRANSLATION--and NOT referring to Rehnquist personally:

The Marxists don't think that Americans are subjugated quite enough that the Citizens would tolerate the blatant, hypocritical EXTERNAL major REVISIONISM on MANY of our historial buildings...YET.

They figure a little more NEA dumbing-down and MTV and we'll be ready.

I say they've got ANOTHER THINK COMING!

Fellow Americans, if this OUTRAGE doesn't energize you to CLEAN HOUSE in future elections at all levels and get Legislators who will IMPEACH judges, I QUESTION YOUR PATRIOTISM.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!

[brazzaville]

Good morning.

Statists and judges fear the idea of nullification more than anything else. Well, maybe they fear the idea of an armed populace more but not by much.

Michael Frazier

[JeffAtlanta]

Hell I don't think your out of line. I don't even care about Roe v. Wade.

Agreed. I'm afraid that a huge battle will be fought over Roe v Wade when it comes to appointing a new justice, but all of these other issues will be ignored. What good will it be if Roe v Wade is overturned if we have lost our republic?

[Chuck54]

TRANSLATION--and NOT referring to Rehnquist personally:

The Marxists don't think that Americans are subjugated quite enough that the Citizens would tolerate the blatant, hypocritical EXTERNAL major REVISIONISM on MANY of our historial buildings...YET.

They figure a little more NEA dumbing-down and MTV and we'll be ready.

I think you have figured it out! Sad.

[Da Mav]

In the file-sharing ruling, this is what the SCOTUS essentially said: Anything that could be used for illegal purposes is wrong.
That's not what they said at all. They said a company which promoted a product as a means of breaking the law could not be held blameless for its actions.
Extrapolating this to firearm ownership, this would be like a company advertising weapons as a means of holding up a bank. The Court ruled that such a company COULD be held liable for a bank holdup depending on the specific facts in the situation. They were not automatically immune. The ruling had nothing to do with lawful activities such as personal or home defense.
At least that's the way I read the decision.

[Semper911]

"We hold that one who distributes a device... is liable for the resulting acts..." Justice David H. Souter wrote for the court.

Dear God in heaven. Do they realize what they have done here?

Companies who manufacture guns, bolt cutters, kitchen knives -- anything that can be used in the commission of a crime-- beware.

[Txsleuth]

I just saw some guy on Fox News that said that basically what the SCOTUS said was that since the sculpture in Texas has been there for 40 years, it was more of an HISTORICAL monument....than religious...

LOLOLOLOLOL.............

They have all gone senile....and none of them will retire, because they are having so much FUN being senile, at the citizens of Americas expense, that they want to do it somemore!!!!

YaY!

BTW, I thought with all of this news today, that finally Fox would go more than 20 minutes without talking about Natalee Aruba, but NO----they are squeezing in unimportant things like Supreme Court decisions between the long pieces on Aruba....Blech!!!!

[Mo1]

BTW, I thought with all of this news today, that finally Fox would go more than 20 minutes without talking about Natalee Aruba, but NO

My heart goes out to her parents and I don't have a problem with them giving update on this case

But FGS .. it would be nice if the reported on something else

[Tree of Liberty]

Question: Does Virginia have an initiative system, like California?

[ReagansRaiders]

Unfortunately, no.

[small voice in the wilderness]

Actually I wouldn't be surprised if the libs. had Roe v. Wade overturned, in the event of a hillary presidency. Afterall, who needs choice when the government can demand abortions for the good of the people?

[Tree of Liberty]

If nullification is to be seriously considered and implemented, it would have to start as an initiative. I don't see any way that institutional government would pass such a measure, as it would dilute their power.

[RobFromGa]

Red=initiative and popular referendum
Yellow= Popular referendum only
Blue= neither
Green= Iniative for Constitutional amendments only

Source: here

The map above only denotes which states have the initiative and popular referendum process (states in which the citizens can place issues on the ballot) and what type.  Every state has some form of the legislative referendum process which allows the government to place issues on the ballot and so therefore is not referenced in the map. However, please click here for a complete listing of legislative referendum states and a breakdown of which states allow legislative constitutional amendments and those that allow legislative statutes.

---

[Tree of Liberty]

Thanks! Never seen a map of initiative states before.