Where's Ruth?
Posted on 05/14/2019 6:37:05 PM PDT by Auntie Mame
The new conservative majority at the Supreme Court seems to have everyone on edge. That is evident following the decision of the Nine to overturn a precedent on the question of whether the Constitution — as Justice Clarence Thomas put it in a majority opinion — “permits a State to be sued by a private party without its consent in the courts of a different State.” The court, which had said yes in 1979, now says no.
Forget that the case has nothing to do with Roe v. Wade (even the Times concedes that). The liberals’ sudden solicitude for stare decisis — meaning the doctrine of standing by precedent — is almost weird. If stare decisis were absolute, we’d still have de jure segregation and the liberals would be locked in the Lochner Era, meaning the years when the Supreme Court protected unbridled economic liberty.
...
The case, known as Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, threw out a precedent that allowed private parties to sue a state in another state’s courts. It’s fascinating that Chief Justice Roberts assigned to write the majority opinion the Court’s most profound justice, Clarence Thomas.
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjFzN3BspziAhWGrlQKHfNOAR4QFjAGegQIAxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourt.gov%2Fopinions%2F18pdf%2F17-1299_8njq.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3K1SEfy7AI6V9gmvnd0wJh
Clickable link to the decision:
Where's Ruth?
We’re not there yet, another nomination by Trump should get us to a conservative court.
Roberts is unreliable as is Kavanaugh.
The Court was wrong in 1979.
Bad decisions should be overturned.
Need an RBG exit in time for a CONSERVATIVE replacement.
Yep. We need a habeas corpos on RGB. I think she’s been dead for months.
“The new conservative majority at the Supreme Court”
I wish. We have a 4-3 liberal court with 2 left of center swing votes.
“permits a State to be sued by a private party without its consent in the courts of a different State.”
Notice how these ‘rulings’ always seem to benefit the lawyers ?
When the court creates a law, it can as easily uncreate it. It’s a consequence of judicial activism.
Nevada v. Hall was a relic from a time when the Supreme Court did not give State sovereignty anywhere near the respect the Court gives it now. Liberals aren't really worried about Hall being overruled. They're worried that Justice Thomas's description of stare decisis is a signal that Roe v. Wade and Obergfell v. Hodges are on thin ice. They're probably right, with the caveat that we never know what Chief Justice John "It's A Tax" Roberts will do.
And Wickard.
As I said upthread, we won’t really have a conservative court until President Trump gets another nomination confirmed.
100% TRUE.
Yours, TMN78247
Yeah, Roberts and Kavanaugh are moderates.
Which is OK by me.
There are no Constitutional liberals on the court now.
I hust want those 4 Constitution-hsting nuts replaced.
Come on Ruth, walk into the light.
Perhaps you misunderstood?
We need Ruth to exit so Trump can ADD a CONSERVATIVE to the court!!!!
With young blood transfusions RBG might outlive us all.
Not only did it not give State sovereignty respect, but actually treated any mention of that as tantamount to white supremacy (aka a dog whistle for racism)...
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.