Posted on 03/10/2006 9:43:20 AM PST by TexasAg1996
Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor showed Thursday that she's not absent from judicial issues. During a speech in Washington, she said Republican leaders' attacks on the courts threaten the constitutional freedoms of Americans.
So now the Supreme Court can't be criticized. I hate judges...
---"she said Republican leaders' attacks on the courts threaten the constitutional freedoms of Americans."---
Are you kidding me?!?! I mean, are you freaking KIDDING me?!?!?!
The very fact that they are criticizing IS a constitutional freedom of Americans!!! How the HELL does the exercise of the freedom to criticize government THREATEN freedom?!?!?!?!?!?!
What the HELL is wrong with her?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
The "problem" of free speech? O'Connor was one of the worst justices in the history of the SCOTUS. She deserves no respect.
To libs such as O'Connor, protests by conservatives are hate speech and must not be tolerated. Remember their whining when we used our free speech rights to destroy Dixie Chicks CDs? Why, that was downright EEEEVIL!
I just listened to the clip and SDO's criticisms were directed toward Tom DeLay and John Cornyn. What tripe! Thank God that lib lover is retired!
Good riddence b*tch. Glad your gone.
You want irresponsible and unjustifiable?
Try Kelo - that did far more damage to our republic than any offhand utterance by a Congresscritter.
O'Connor believes in the supremacy of the courts over the Constitution. It is good that she is retired.
We critizied her, and that's threatening the judicial system.
HaHa!
I agree completely!
Hey Sandra, you retired! Go visit the grandkids, go grab the early bird special at Denny's! Anything! just shut up.
That's certainly myopic. No matter how much you may disagree with O'Connor, she certainly was no Abe Fortas.
You retired. Your opinion no longer matters.
Wrong.
Her opinion now counts as much as mine does.
However, The present Supreme Court doesn't even know she has an opinion.
Kelo is actually an example of the system working.
Emineant Domain has long been allowed for economic revitalization, even for private development. Kelo cites several authorities that showed it was allowed even in the 1800's, and was hardly innovative. The Supreme Court ruled conservatively - that it wasn't their place to say it couldn't happen. The system then took over - and there are very few jurisdictions that will exert that power. Many states are quite likely to prohibit within their own constitutions the exercise of Eminent Domain under these circumstances - and they can do that.
The system worked.
Kelo only bolstered the power of our government,given by the XVI amendment,to take property from one citizen and give it to another.
And that's wrong. If private property can be taken by the state simply to generate more tax dollars, it really isn't private property any longer - and we have no real property rights and are one step closer to serfdom.
If you actually believe what you just wrote, we really don't have much of anything in common to discuss. Even O'Connor viewed Kelo as an abomination.
And the amount class went right through the floor when you showed up....
Abe Fortas never made it on the court.
Boy, you're just full of deep thoughts, aren't you?
Not that she couldn't have said something like this, but considering the source, I have to wonder what O'Connor really said. Remember, this in Nina Totenberg reporting on NPR. The distance between what Nina reports and what really happened is typically measured in light years.
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.