" Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's interpretation of the Constitution" Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
(dissenting Kelo v. New London)
Posted on 06/25/2017 2:22:59 PM PDT by nickcarraway
" Something has gone seriously awry with this Court's interpretation of the Constitution" Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
(dissenting Kelo v. New London)
When Clarence Thomas goes he will be sorely missed. No standing! Ridiculously absurd.
This seizure crap, is completely against USConstitution. The supreme law needs be followed, or perish.
“Civil Asset Forfeiture is a direct offshoot of the war on drugs. And any conservative who doesn’t condemn it isn’t a real conservative.”
I am utterly & disgusted by this process. I have no problem seizing the assets of some druggy or mobster - if it can be PROVEN that the assets were gained through illegal means.
Why the SC refused to take up this case - leaving it to Thomas to offer his (non-binding?) opinion is disturbing.
Hmmm - drop the ‘&’...
And then there was Roe v. Wade; some fifty million and counting.
The lesbians’ (yes, they’re ‘special’ people in the DC Circuit) story is hilarious.
http://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/DEA-to-Keep-18000-Amtrak-Passenger-Found-in-Backpack-389680831.html
But they certainly do have the right to make it before a jury.
You are 90% correct. There is that small piece about the New York Times, Duranty and the Pulitzer that has always bothered me.
The fact that Hitler and Uncle Joe killed a lot of people get short shrift - Hitler Bad everyone agrees, Uncle Joe - gets a trip to Yolta and all of Easter Europe.
I have never agreed with civil asset forfeiture. I don’t understand Jeff Sessions defending it.
Quite simple: so-called "conservatives" who believe that the end justifies the means, and that taking totalitarian statist shortcuts is therefore an acceptable strategy.
After all, anyone with substantial amounts of cash is probably a drug dealer or a money launderer, right? Fighting the "war on drugs" is surely more important than protecting actual Liberty, isn't it?
Isn't it great to be free to choose between the two alternatives of Left-wing Tyranny or Right-wing Tyranny?
And yet there are some who say we're not truly free!
Bravo to a great, great, great American!!!
The SC needs four justices to vote to take the case. My guess is that the anti-seizure justices felt they weren't going to get a fifth vote, and didn't want to have a SC decision upholding seizure. They may revisit the issue if Kennedy or Ginsberg goes and is replaced by a constitutional originalist.
His exhaustive study of genocide and democide is well worth reading and understanding. Most of what is considered 'knowledge' on the topic in popular culture is inadequate, inaccurate, and incomplete.
Don’t think the poster was trying to minimize Hitler’s crimes. Rather the post was meant to illustrate that by quantity, and without the sense of style of the likes of Hugo Boss, Stalin’s crimes overshadowed those of the Bohemian Corporal’s.
Sue to get your own money back? The case was originally dismissed with a “no standing”ruling. No standing for your own assets???
He’s right.
could Leonard bring her case back ?
Why is there any “need” to fight drug dealers. Let them sell their drugs, and let those stupid enough to buy them die. Win-win-win situation.
I do love this man.
He like Mary Poppins, practically perfect in every way.
And Mao overshadowed both but he had more people to work with.
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.
