• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Case?

Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

BWG said:
Maybe not never, but it has been a while.
Click to expand...


Ok, so he isn't vocal. I am pretty sure with his political affiliation you really don't want him to be do you?

Or do you fall into that same camp as those protesting outside the Palm Springs, Koch bros. event that think we should "string him up"?


j-mac
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

Now the left is clearly in fear of having this totalitarian edict tossed out as being unconstitutional, that much is obvious. This is what happens when one party continually attempts to use the court to circumvent the will of the people. History has demonstrated that all edicts that come from Big Brother that are not vetted by the will of the people in this self governed Constitutional Republic.....result in abstract failures.

Simply look to history and the New (communist) Deal mandated by FDR under the pretense that he was going to establish a second bill of rights (which are nothing but mirrored verbatim copies of articles 41-46 of the Soviet Constitution).....all the programs that were placed into service void of constitutional authority are now failing and are nothing but a burden upon the working people of these United States. Go down the list, all of the points sought after by the progressive left in this nation are failures and are nothing but an anchor holding this nations economy back...why? Because the People had no say in their implementation, the entire NEW DEAL was forced upon the People by the Supreme Court....all hand picked appointees of FDR.

If these programs were authorized by the Federal Constitution WHY promote their sale as a supposed SECOND BILL OF RIGHTS.....the entire Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, are all AMENDMENTS OF THE CONSTITUTION. Thus, either the constitution needed changed by the Voice of the People in a super majority 75% customary fashion....or the SECOND BILL OF RIGHTS are still to this day constitutionally illegal. As of this day I see no Amendments to the Constitution suggesting these same things the Soviet Constitution guarantees as a right, are considered RIGHTS by the PEOPLE of these United States. And that list still exits today as the Holy Grail of communist progressives.

1. Employment at a living wage of the Second Bill of Rights, Article 40, USSR CONSTITUTION.

2. Freedom from unfair competition, i.e, MONOPOLIES, (of course except those established by the state through the customary pay off bribery system known as lobbying)

3. Housing, 3rd of the projected Second Bill of Rights, Article 44 of the USSR CONSTITUTION.

4. Medical Care, 4th on the Second Bill of Rights proposals, Article 42 of the USSR CONSTITUTION.

5. Education, guaranteed by BIG BROTHER, of course after they establish courses of study as per the right to qualify for a FEDERAL EDUCATION LOAN (i.e., indoctrination by the state), Article 45 of the USSR CONSTITUTION.

6. OLD AGE PENSIONS and SOCIAL SECURITY guaranteed by the STATE (as we speak all these underfunded UNION PENSIONS and Social Security are insolvent), Article 43 of the USSR Constitution.

I defy anyone to find a list of these supposed RIGHTS existing in the United States Constitution or following amendments. But they all exist under the Communist Constitutions of the 1930s and 70s. The same can apply for this new Health Care legislation, the authority does not exist, thus they attempt to place their foot in the door of the PEOPLES HOUSE and personal life by MAKING THEM engage in COMMERCE (the mandatory purchase of insurance) in order to regulate their lives under the enumerated authority of the Commerce Clause. That is not freedom but an Act of TOTALITARIAN self professed authority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights

http://www.constitution.org/cons/ussr77.txt
 
Last edited:
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

j-mac said:
Ok, so he isn't vocal. I am pretty sure with his political affiliation you really don't want him to be do you?

Or do you fall into that same camp as those protesting outside the Palm Springs, Koch bros. event that think we should "string him up"?


j-mac
Click to expand...



You got all that out of a direct answer to your direct question?

My, what issues you must have. . . .:2wave:
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

upsideguy said:
Guess what? There are intellectual lightweights in all shapes, sizes, colors, creeds and nationalities. Sorry, but a Supreme Court justice that never asks a question of the litigants, never says anything in court, never authors an opinion is a light-weight.
Click to expand...


Opinions by Clarence Thomas. Doesn't include Concurrences or Dissents...

Supreme Court Collection: Opinions by Justice Thomas



Opinions
14 PENN PLAZA LLC, ET AL. v. PYETT, STEVEN, ET AL. , , 04/01/09
AETNA HEALTH INC., ETC. v. DAVILA, JUAN , 542 U.S. 200 (2004), 06/21/04
ALASKA v. NATIVE VILLAGE OF VENETIETRIBAL GOVERNMENT , 522 U.S. 520 (1998), 02/25/98
ALI, ABDUS-SHAHID M. S. v. FED. BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL. , , 01/22/08
ANDERSON, DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, et al. v. EDWARDS, guardian ad litem for EDWARDS, et al. , 514 U.S. 143 (1995), 03/22/95
ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN. v. ACLU, ET AL. , 535 U.S. 564 (2002), 05/13/02
ASTRUE, COMM'R, SOCIAL SEC. v. RATLIFF, CATHERINE G. , , 06/14/10
ATLANTIC SOUNDING CO., INC. v. TOWNSEND, EDGAR L. , , 06/25/09
AZ DEPT. OF REVENUE v. BLAZE CONSTR. CO. , 526 U.S. 32 (1999), 03/02/99
BARAL, DAVID H. v. UNITED STATES , 528 U.S. 431 (2000), 02/22/00
BARNHART, COMMR, SOC SEC v. SIGMON COAL CO., ET AL. , 534 U.S. 438 (2002), 02/19/02
BD. OF ED., POTTAWATOMIE CTY v. EARLS, LINDSAY, ET AL. , 536 U.S. 822 (2002), 06/27/02
BEARD, SEC., PA DOC, ET AL. v. BANKS, GEORGE E. , 542 U.S. 406 (2004), 06/24/04
BECK, ROBERT A. v. PRUPIS, ROBERT M., ET AL. , 529 U.S. 494 (2000), 00/00/00
BLOATE, TAYLOR J. v. UNITED STATES , , 03/08/10
BOGAN v. SCOTT-HARRIS , 523 U.S. 44 (1998), 03/03/98
BOWLES, KEITH v. RUSSELL, WARDEN , , 06/14/07
BRIDGE, JOHN, ET AL. v. PHOENIX BOND & INDEMNITY, ET AL. , , 06/09/08
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al. v. MORALES , 514 U.S. 499 (1995), 04/25/95
CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT et al. v. DILLINGHAM CONSTRUCTION, N. A., INC., et al. , 519 U.S. 316 (1997), 02/18/97
CARCIERI, GOV. OF RI, ET AL. v. KEMPTHORNE, SEC. OF INTERIOR , , 02/24/09
CAREY, WARDEN v. MUSLADIN, MATHEW , 549 U.S. 70 (2006), 12/11/06
CARLSBAD TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. HIF BIO, INC., ET AL. , , 05/04/09
CARTER, FLOYD J. v. UNITED STATES , 530 U.S. 255 (2000), 06/12/00
CASS COUNTY v. LEECH LAKE BAND OFCHIPPEWA INDIANS , 524 U.S. 103 (1998), 06/08/98
CHAVEZ, BEN v. MARTINEZ, OLIVERIO , 538 U.S. 760 (2003), 05/27/03
CHRISTENSEN, EDWARD, ET AL. v. HARRIS CTY., TX, ET AL. , 529 U.S. 576 (2000), 05/01/00
CLINGMAN, SEC., OK ELECTION BD. v. BEAVER, ANDREA L., ET AL. , 544 U.S. 581 (2005), 05/23/05
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION v. GOTTSHALL , 512 U.S. 532 (1994), 06/24/94
COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC. v. AVIALL SERVICES, INC. , 543 U.S. 157 (2004), 12/13/04
CUELLAR, HUMBERTO F. R. v. UNITED STATES , , 06/02/08
CUNNINGHAM, TERESA v. HAMILTON COUNTY , 527 U.S. 198 (1999), 06/14/99
DELAWARE v. NEW YORK , 507 U.S. 490 (1993), 03/30/93
DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, ET AL. v. PUBLIC CITIZEN, ET AL. , 541 U.S. 752 (2004), 06/07/04
DESERT PALACE, INC. v. COSTA, CATHARINA F. , 539 U.S. 90 (2003), 06/09/03
DIR. OF REVENUE OF MO v. CoBANK ACB , 531 U.S. 316 (2001), 02/20/01
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. GREATER , 506 U.S. 125 (1992), 12/14/92
DOOLEY v. KOREAN AIR LINES CO. , 524 U.S. 116 (1998), 06/08/98
eBAY INC., ET AL. v. MERcEXCHANGE, L.L.C. , 547 U.S. 388 (2006), 05/15/06
EGELHOFF, DONNA R. v. EGELHOFF, SAMANTHA, ET AL. , 532 U.S. 141 (2001), 03/21/01
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, INC. v. LOUISIANA PUBLIC SERV. COMM. , 539 U.S. 39 (2003), 06/02/03
EXXON CO., U. S. A., et al. v. SOFEC, INC., et al. , 517 U.S. 830 (1996), 06/10/96
FARRAR et al., COADMINISTRATORS OF ESTATE OF FARRAR, DECEASED v. HOBBY , 506 U.S. 103 (1992), 12/14/92
FED. MARITIME COMM'N v. SC STATE PORTS AUTHORITY , 535 U.S. 743 (2002), 05/28/02
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION et al. v. BEACH COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al. , 508 U.S. 307 (1993), 06/01/93
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION v. MEYER , 510 U.S. 471 (1994), 02/23/94
FELTNER v. COLUMBIA PICTURES TELEVISION, INC. , 523 U.S. 340 (1998), 03/31/98
FL DEPT. OF REVENUE v. PICCADILLY CAFETERIAS, INC. , , 06/16/08
FLORIDA v. WHITE, TYVESSEL TYVORUS , 526 U.S. 559 (1999), 05/17/99
FREIGHTLINER CORP. et al. v. MYRICK et al. , 514 U.S. 280 (1995), 04/18/95
GITLITZ, D., ET UX., ET AL. v. CIR , 531 U.S. 206 (2001), 01/09/01
GODINEZ, WARDEN v. MORAN , 509 U.S. 389 (1993), 06/24/93
GOOD NEWS CLUB, ET AL. v. MILFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL , 533 U.S. 98 (2001), 06/11/01
GRAHAM COUNTY WATER DISTRICT v. U. S., ex rel. WILSON , 545 U.S. 409 (2005), 06/20/05
GRANITE ROCK COMPANY v. INT'L BHD. OF TEAMSTERS, ET AL. , , 06/24/10
GROSS, JACK v. FBL FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. , , 06/18/09
HARDT, BRIDGET v. RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE INS. , , 05/24/10
HARPER et al. v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION , 509 U.S. 86 (1993), 06/18/93
HARRIS TRUST & SAVINGS BANK v. SALOMON BROS., INC., ET AL. , 530 U.S. 238 (2000), 06/12/00
HOPKINS v. REEVES , 524 U.S. 88 (1998), 06/08/98
HOUSEHOLD CREDIT SERVICES v. PFENNIG, SHARON R. , 541 U.S. 232 (2004), 04/21/04
HUGHES AIRCRAFT CO., ET AL. v. JACOBSON, STANLEY, ET AL. , 525 U.S. 432 (1999), 01/25/99
HUNT, GOV. OF NC, ET AL. v. CROMARTIE, MARTIN, ET AL. , 526 U.S. 541 (1999), 05/17/99
J.E.M. AG SUPPLY, ET AL. v. PIONEER HI-BRED INTL. , 534 U.S. 124 (2001), 12/10/01
JIMENEZ, CARLOS v. QUARTERMAN, DIR., TX DOC , , 01/13/09
JONES, LOUIS v. UNITED STATES , 527 U.S. 373 (1999), 06/21/99
KANSAS v. HENDRICKS , 521 U.S. 346 (1997), 06/23/97
KANSAS v. MARSH, MICHAEL L. , 548 U.S. 163 (2006), 06/26/06
KNOWLES, WARDEN v. MIRZAYANCE, ALEXANDRE , , 03/24/09
LAWRENCE, GARY v. FLORIDA , 549 U.S. 327 (2007), 02/20/07
LOCKHEED CORP. et al. v. SPINK , 517 U.S. 882 (1996), 06/10/96
MAGWOOD, BILLY J. v. CULLIVER, WARDEN, ET AL. , , 06/24/10
MATSU****A ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., et al. v. EPSTEIN , 516 U.S. 367 (1996), 02/27/96
MELENDEZ v. UNITED STATES , 518 U.S. 120 (1996), 06/17/96
MITCHELL, GUY, ET AL. v. HELMS, MARY L., ET AL. , 530 U.S. 793 (2000), 06/28/00
MOYLAN, ATT'Y GEN. OF GUAM v. CAMACHO, GOV. OF GUAM , 549 U.S. 483 (2007), 03/27/07
NAT'L CABLE & TELECOMM. ASSN. v. BRAND X INTERNET SERVICES , 545 U.S. 967 (2005), 06/27/05
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMIN. v. FIRST NAT.BANK & TRUST CO. , 522 U.S. 479 (1998), 02/25/98
NATIONAL PRIVATE TRUCK COUNCIL, INC., et al. v. OKLAHOMA TAX COMMISSION et al. , 515 U.S. 582 (1995), 06/19/95
NATL. PARK HOSP. ASSN. v. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL. , 538 U.S. 803 (2003), 05/27/03
NATL. RR PASSENGER CORP. v. MORGAN, ABNER , 536 U.S. 101 (2002), 06/10/02
NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. LOEWENSTEIN , 513 U.S. 123 (1994), 12/12/94
NOBELMAN et ux. v. AMERICAN SAVINGS BANK , 508 U.S. 324 (1993), 06/01/93
NORFOLK & WESTERN RAILWAY CO. v. HILES , 516 U.S. 400 (1996), 02/27/96
NORTHEASTERN FLORIDA CHAPTER OF THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, , 508 U.S. 656 (1993), 06/14/93
Northern Ins. Co. of New York v. CHATHAM COUNTY, GA , 547 U.S. 189 (2006), 04/25/06
O'DELL v. NETHERLAND, WARDEN, et al. , 521 U.S. 151 (1997), 06/19/97
OLYMPIC AIRWAYS v. HUSAIN, RUBINA, ETC., ET AL. , 540 U.S. 644 (2004), 02/24/04
OREGON WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OF THE , 511 U.S. 93 (1994), 04/04/94
ORFF, FRANCIS A., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES, ET AL. , 545 U.S. 596 (2005), 06/23/05
PASQUANTINO, DAVID B., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES , 544 U.S. 349 (2005), 04/26/05
PEACOCK v. THOMAS , 516 U.S. 349 (1996), 02/21/96
Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott , 524 U.S. 357 (1998), 06/22/98
PERMANENT MISSION ETC., ET AL. v. NEW YORK, NY , , 06/14/07
PIERCE COUNTY, WA v. GUILLEN, IGNACIO, ET AL. , 537 U.S. 129 (2003), 01/14/03
PLILER, WARDEN v. FORD, RICHARD H. , 542 U.S. 225 (2004), 06/21/04
POLLARD, SHARON B. v. E. I. DuPONT de NEMOURS , 532 U.S. 843 (2001), 06/04/01
QUANTA COMPUTER, INC., ET AL. v. LG ELECTRONICS, INC. , , 06/09/08
RAKE et al. v. WADE, TRUSTEE , 508 U.S. 464 (1993), 06/07/93
RAYTHEON CO. v. HERNANDEZ, JOEL , 540 U.S. 44 (2003), 12/02/03
REED ELSEVIER, INC., ET AL. v. MUCHNICK, IRVIN, ET AL. , , 03/02/10
ROBERTSON, CHIEF, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, et al. v. SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY , 503 U.S. 429 (1992), 03/25/92
ROBINSON v. SHELL OIL CO. , 519 U.S. 337 (1997), 02/18/97
ROUSEY, RICHARD G., ET UX. v. JACOWAY, JILL R. , 544 U.S. 320 (2005), 04/04/05
RUBIN, SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY v. COORS BREWING CO. , 514 U.S. 476 (1995), 04/19/95
SCHRIRO, DIR., AZ DOC v. LANDRIGAN, JEFFREY T. , , 05/14/07
SCHWAB, WILLIAM G. v. REILLY, NADEJDA , , 06/17/10
SHANNON v. UNITED STATES , 512 U.S. 573 (1994), 06/24/94
SHAW, ROBERT, ET AL. v. MURPHY, KEVIN , 532 U.S. 223 (2001), 04/18/01
SIMS, JUATASSA v. APFEL, COMM'R, SOCIAL SEC. , 530 U.S. 103 (2000), 06/05/00
SMTIH, WARDEN v. ROBBINS, LEE , 528 U.S. 259 (2000), 01/19/00
SOUTH DAKOTA v. BOURLAND, individually and as chairman of the CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, et al. , 508 U.S. 679 (1993), 06/14/93
SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT CO. v. MENDELSOHN, ELLEN , , 02/26/08
STAPLES v. UNITED STATES , 511 U.S. 600 (1994), 05/23/94
STEWART, WILLARD v. DUTRA CONST. CO. , 543 U.S. 481 (2005), 02/22/05
SWIERKIEWICZ, AKOS v. SOREMA N.A. , 534 U.S. 506 (2002), 02/26/02
TAYLOR v. FREELAND & KRONZ et al. , 503 U.S. 638 (1992), 04/21/92
TEXACO, INC. v. DAGHER, FOUAD N., ET AL. , 547 U.S. 1 (2006), 02/28/06
THINGS REMEMBERED, INC. v. PETRARCA , 516 U.S. 124 (1995), 12/05/95
TYLER, MELVIN v. CAIN, WARDEN , 533 U.S. 656 (2001), 06/28/01
U. S., EX REL. EISENSTEIN v. NEW YORK, NY, ET AL. , , 06/08/09
UNITED STATES v. SALERNO et al. , 505 U.S. 317 (1992), 06/19/92
UNITED STATES v. LaBONTE et al. , 520 U.S. 751 (1997), 05/27/97
UNITED STATES v. SCHEFFER , 523 U.S. 303 (1998), 03/31/98
UNITED STATES v. GALLETTI , 541 U.S. 114 (2004), 03/23/04
UNITED STATES v. OAKLAND CANNABIS, ET AL. , 532 U.S. 483 (2001), 05/14/01
UNITED STATES v. ATLANTIC RESEARCH CORP. , , 06/11/07
UNITED STATES v. RODRIGUEZ-MORENO, JACINTO , 526 U.S. 275 (1999), 03/30/99
UNITED STATES v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP. , 517 U.S. 843 (1996), 06/10/96
UNITED STATES v. BAJAKAJIAN , 524 U.S. 321 (1998), 06/22/98
UNITED STATES v. PATANE, SAMUEL F. , 542 U.S. 630 (2004), 06/28/04
UNITED STATES v. WILSON , 503 U.S. 329 (1992), 03/24/92
UNITED STATES v. ALVAREZ SANCHEZ , 511 U.S. 350 (1994), 05/02/94
UNITED STATES v. MEZZANATTO , 513 U.S. 196 (1995), 01/18/95
UNITED STATES DEPT. OF DEFENSE v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS , 510 U.S. 487 (1994), 02/23/94
UNITED STATES, ET AL. v. BEAN, THOMAS L. , 537 U.S. 71 (2002), 12/10/02
UNITED STUDENT AID FUNDS, INC. v. ESPINOSA, FRANCISCO J. , , 03/23/10
UNITHERM FOOD SYS., INC. v. SWIFT-ECKRICH, INC., ET AL. , 546 U.S. 394 (2006), 01/23/06
WADDINGTON, SUPT., WA v. SARAUSAD, CESAR , , 01/21/09
WAGNON, SECRETARY, KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. PRAIRIE BAND POTAWATOMI NATION , 546 U.S. 95 (2005), 12/06/05
WARNER JENKINSON CO., INC. v. HILTON DAVIS CHEMICAL CO. , 520 U.S. 17 (1997), 03/03/97
WASHINGTON v. RECUENCO, ARTURO R. , 548 U.S. 212 (2006), 06/26/06
WASHINGTON STATE GRANGE v. WA REPUBLICAN PARTY, ET AL. , , 03/18/08
WEYERHAEUSER CO. v. ROSS-SIMMONS HARDWOOD LUMBER CO. , 549 U.S. 312 (2007), 02/20/07
WILSON v. ARKANSAS , 514 U.S. 927 (1995), 05/22/95
WOODFORD, WARDEN v. GARCEAU, ROBERT F. , 538 U.S. 202 (2003), 03/25/03
WRIGHT, WARDEN, et al. v. WEST , 505 U.S. 277 (1992), 06/19/92
YOUNG et al. v. HARPER , 520 U.S. 143 (1997), 03/18/97
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

BWG said:
You got all that out of a direct answer to your direct question?

My, what issues you must have. . . .:2wave:
Click to expand...


No, I am simply asking....Unless you thought that you could pop in have your say, and not be challenged?


j-mac
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

j-mac said:
No, I am simply asking....Unless you thought that you could pop in have your say, and not be challenged?


j-mac
Click to expand...



The conversation:

upsideguy said:
Guess what? There are intellectual lightweights in all shapes, sizes, colors, creeds and nationalities. Sorry, but a Supreme Court justice that never asks a question of the litigants, never says anything in court, never authors an opinion is a light-weight.
Click to expand...
j-mac said:
never? Really, and I am sure that a some search will prove you right?
Click to expand...
ME said:
Maybe not never, but it has been a while.
Click to expand...

A week from Tuesday, when the Supreme Court returns from its midwinter break and hears arguments in two criminal cases, it will have been five years since Justice Clarence Thomas has spoken during a court argument.
[...]
In the past 40 years, no other justice has gone an entire term, much less five, without speaking at least once during arguments, according to Timothy R. Johnson, a professor of political science at the University of Minnesota.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/us/13thomas.html?_r=2&hp
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Challenge away. As long as it's on it's on something I posted, and not what you have manufactured in your mind, I have no problem responding.

Take your bait elsewhere, I'm not biting.
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

Cole said:
Opinions by Clarence Thomas. Doesn't include Concurrences or Dissents...

Supreme Court Collection: Opinions by Justice Thomas

Opinions
14 PENN PLAZA LLC, ET AL. v. PYETT, STEVEN, ET AL. , , 04/01/09
AETNA HEALTH INC., ETC. v. DAVILA, JUAN , 542 U.S. 200 (2004), 06/21/04
ALASKA v. NATIVE VILLAGE OF VENETIETRIBAL GOVERNMENT , 522 U.S. 520 (1998), 02/25/98
ALI, ABDUS-SHAHID M. S. v. FED. BUREAU OF PRISONS, ET AL. , , 01/22/08
ANDERSON, DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, et al. v. EDWARDS, guardian ad litem for EDWARDS, et al. , 514 U.S. 143 (1995), 03/22/95
ASHCROFT, ATTY. GEN. v. ACLU, ET AL. , 535 U.S. 564 (2002), 05/13/02
ASTRUE, COMM'R, SOCIAL SEC. v. RATLIFF, CATHERINE G. , , 06/14/10
ATLANTIC SOUNDING CO., INC. v. TOWNSEND, EDGAR L. , , 06/25/09
AZ DEPT. OF REVENUE v. BLAZE CONSTR. CO. , 526 U.S. 32 (1999), 03/02/99
BARAL, DAVID H. v. UNITED STATES , 528 U.S. 431 (2000), 02/22/00
BARNHART, COMMR, SOC SEC v. SIGMON COAL CO., ET AL. , 534 U.S. 438 (2002), 02/19/02
BD. OF ED., POTTAWATOMIE CTY v. EARLS, LINDSAY, ET AL. , 536 U.S. 822 (2002), 06/27/02
BEARD, SEC., PA DOC, ET AL. v. BANKS, GEORGE E. , 542 U.S. 406 (2004), 06/24/04
BECK, ROBERT A. v. PRUPIS, ROBERT M., ET AL. , 529 U.S. 494 (2000), 00/00/00
BLOATE, TAYLOR J. v. UNITED STATES , , 03/08/10
BOGAN v. SCOTT-HARRIS , 523 U.S. 44 (1998), 03/03/98
BOWLES, KEITH v. RUSSELL, WARDEN , , 06/14/07
BRIDGE, JOHN, ET AL. v. PHOENIX BOND & INDEMNITY, ET AL. , , 06/09/08
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al. v. MORALES , 514 U.S. 499 (1995), 04/25/95
CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT et al. v. DILLINGHAM CONSTRUCTION, N. A., INC., et al. , 519 U.S. 316 (1997), 02/18/97
CARCIERI, GOV. OF RI, ET AL. v. KEMPTHORNE, SEC. OF INTERIOR , , 02/24/09
CAREY, WARDEN v. MUSLADIN, MATHEW , 549 U.S. 70 (2006), 12/11/06
CARLSBAD TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. HIF BIO, INC., ET AL. , , 05/04/09
CARTER, FLOYD J. v. UNITED STATES , 530 U.S. 255 (2000), 06/12/00
CASS COUNTY v. LEECH LAKE BAND OFCHIPPEWA INDIANS , 524 U.S. 103 (1998), 06/08/98
CHAVEZ, BEN v. MARTINEZ, OLIVERIO , 538 U.S. 760 (2003), 05/27/03
CHRISTENSEN, EDWARD, ET AL. v. HARRIS CTY., TX, ET AL. , 529 U.S. 576 (2000), 05/01/00
CLINGMAN, SEC., OK ELECTION BD. v. BEAVER, ANDREA L., ET AL. , 544 U.S. 581 (2005), 05/23/05
CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION v. GOTTSHALL , 512 U.S. 532 (1994), 06/24/94
COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC. v. AVIALL SERVICES, INC. , 543 U.S. 157 (2004), 12/13/04
CUELLAR, HUMBERTO F. R. v. UNITED STATES , , 06/02/08
CUNNINGHAM, TERESA v. HAMILTON COUNTY , 527 U.S. 198 (1999), 06/14/99
DELAWARE v. NEW YORK , 507 U.S. 490 (1993), 03/30/93
DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, ET AL. v. PUBLIC CITIZEN, ET AL. , 541 U.S. 752 (2004), 06/07/04
DESERT PALACE, INC. v. COSTA, CATHARINA F. , 539 U.S. 90 (2003), 06/09/03
DIR. OF REVENUE OF MO v. CoBANK ACB , 531 U.S. 316 (2001), 02/20/01
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. GREATER , 506 U.S. 125 (1992), 12/14/92
DOOLEY v. KOREAN AIR LINES CO. , 524 U.S. 116 (1998), 06/08/98
eBAY INC., ET AL. v. MERcEXCHANGE, L.L.C. , 547 U.S. 388 (2006), 05/15/06
EGELHOFF, DONNA R. v. EGELHOFF, SAMANTHA, ET AL. , 532 U.S. 141 (2001), 03/21/01
ENTERGY LOUISIANA, INC. v. LOUISIANA PUBLIC SERV. COMM. , 539 U.S. 39 (2003), 06/02/03
EXXON CO., U. S. A., et al. v. SOFEC, INC., et al. , 517 U.S. 830 (1996), 06/10/96
FARRAR et al., COADMINISTRATORS OF ESTATE OF FARRAR, DECEASED v. HOBBY , 506 U.S. 103 (1992), 12/14/92
FED. MARITIME COMM'N v. SC STATE PORTS AUTHORITY , 535 U.S. 743 (2002), 05/28/02
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION et al. v. BEACH COMMUNICATIONS, INC., et al. , 508 U.S. 307 (1993), 06/01/93
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION v. MEYER , 510 U.S. 471 (1994), 02/23/94
FELTNER v. COLUMBIA PICTURES TELEVISION, INC. , 523 U.S. 340 (1998), 03/31/98
FL DEPT. OF REVENUE v. PICCADILLY CAFETERIAS, INC. , , 06/16/08
FLORIDA v. WHITE, TYVESSEL TYVORUS , 526 U.S. 559 (1999), 05/17/99
FREIGHTLINER CORP. et al. v. MYRICK et al. , 514 U.S. 280 (1995), 04/18/95
GITLITZ, D., ET UX., ET AL. v. CIR , 531 U.S. 206 (2001), 01/09/01
GODINEZ, WARDEN v. MORAN , 509 U.S. 389 (1993), 06/24/93
GOOD NEWS CLUB, ET AL. v. MILFORD CENTRAL SCHOOL , 533 U.S. 98 (2001), 06/11/01
GRAHAM COUNTY WATER DISTRICT v. U. S., ex rel. WILSON , 545 U.S. 409 (2005), 06/20/05
GRANITE ROCK COMPANY v. INT'L BHD. OF TEAMSTERS, ET AL. , , 06/24/10
GROSS, JACK v. FBL FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. , , 06/18/09
HARDT, BRIDGET v. RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE INS. , , 05/24/10
HARPER et al. v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION , 509 U.S. 86 (1993), 06/18/93
HARRIS TRUST & SAVINGS BANK v. SALOMON BROS., INC., ET AL. , 530 U.S. 238 (2000), 06/12/00
HOPKINS v. REEVES , 524 U.S. 88 (1998), 06/08/98
HOUSEHOLD CREDIT SERVICES v. PFENNIG, SHARON R. , 541 U.S. 232 (2004), 04/21/04
HUGHES AIRCRAFT CO., ET AL. v. JACOBSON, STANLEY, ET AL. , 525 U.S. 432 (1999), 01/25/99
HUNT, GOV. OF NC, ET AL. v. CROMARTIE, MARTIN, ET AL. , 526 U.S. 541 (1999), 05/17/99
J.E.M. AG SUPPLY, ET AL. v. PIONEER HI-BRED INTL. , 534 U.S. 124 (2001), 12/10/01
JIMENEZ, CARLOS v. QUARTERMAN, DIR., TX DOC , , 01/13/09
JONES, LOUIS v. UNITED STATES , 527 U.S. 373 (1999), 06/21/99
KANSAS v. HENDRICKS , 521 U.S. 346 (1997), 06/23/97
KANSAS v. MARSH, MICHAEL L. , 548 U.S. 163 (2006), 06/26/06
KNOWLES, WARDEN v. MIRZAYANCE, ALEXANDRE , , 03/24/09
LAWRENCE, GARY v. FLORIDA , 549 U.S. 327 (2007), 02/20/07
LOCKHEED CORP. et al. v. SPINK , 517 U.S. 882 (1996), 06/10/96
MAGWOOD, BILLY J. v. CULLIVER, WARDEN, ET AL. , , 06/24/10
MATSU****A ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD., et al. v. EPSTEIN , 516 U.S. 367 (1996), 02/27/96
MELENDEZ v. UNITED STATES , 518 U.S. 120 (1996), 06/17/96
MITCHELL, GUY, ET AL. v. HELMS, MARY L., ET AL. , 530 U.S. 793 (2000), 06/28/00
MOYLAN, ATT'Y GEN. OF GUAM v. CAMACHO, GOV. OF GUAM , 549 U.S. 483 (2007), 03/27/07
NAT'L CABLE & TELECOMM. ASSN. v. BRAND X INTERNET SERVICES , 545 U.S. 967 (2005), 06/27/05
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMIN. v. FIRST NAT.BANK & TRUST CO. , 522 U.S. 479 (1998), 02/25/98
NATIONAL PRIVATE TRUCK COUNCIL, INC., et al. v. OKLAHOMA TAX COMMISSION et al. , 515 U.S. 582 (1995), 06/19/95
NATL. PARK HOSP. ASSN. v. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR, ET AL. , 538 U.S. 803 (2003), 05/27/03
NATL. RR PASSENGER CORP. v. MORGAN, ABNER , 536 U.S. 101 (2002), 06/10/02
NEBRASKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. LOEWENSTEIN , 513 U.S. 123 (1994), 12/12/94
NOBELMAN et ux. v. AMERICAN SAVINGS BANK , 508 U.S. 324 (1993), 06/01/93
NORFOLK & WESTERN RAILWAY CO. v. HILES , 516 U.S. 400 (1996), 02/27/96
NORTHEASTERN FLORIDA CHAPTER OF THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA v. CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, , 508 U.S. 656 (1993), 06/14/93
Northern Ins. Co. of New York v. CHATHAM COUNTY, GA , 547 U.S. 189 (2006), 04/25/06
O'DELL v. NETHERLAND, WARDEN, et al. , 521 U.S. 151 (1997), 06/19/97
OLYMPIC AIRWAYS v. HUSAIN, RUBINA, ETC., ET AL. , 540 U.S. 644 (2004), 02/24/04
OREGON WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. v. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY OF THE , 511 U.S. 93 (1994), 04/04/94
ORFF, FRANCIS A., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES, ET AL. , 545 U.S. 596 (2005), 06/23/05
PASQUANTINO, DAVID B., ET AL. v. UNITED STATES , 544 U.S. 349 (2005), 04/26/05
PEACOCK v. THOMAS , 516 U.S. 349 (1996), 02/21/96
Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole v. Scott , 524 U.S. 357 (1998), 06/22/98
PERMANENT MISSION ETC., ET AL. v. NEW YORK, NY , , 06/14/07
PIERCE COUNTY, WA v. GUILLEN, IGNACIO, ET AL. , 537 U.S. 129 (2003), 01/14/03
PLILER, WARDEN v. FORD, RICHARD H. , 542 U.S. 225 (2004), 06/21/04
POLLARD, SHARON B. v. E. I. DuPONT de NEMOURS , 532 U.S. 843 (2001), 06/04/01
QUANTA COMPUTER, INC., ET AL. v. LG ELECTRONICS, INC. , , 06/09/08
RAKE et al. v. WADE, TRUSTEE , 508 U.S. 464 (1993), 06/07/93
RAYTHEON CO. v. HERNANDEZ, JOEL , 540 U.S. 44 (2003), 12/02/03
REED ELSEVIER, INC., ET AL. v. MUCHNICK, IRVIN, ET AL. , , 03/02/10
ROBERTSON, CHIEF, UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, et al. v. SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY , 503 U.S. 429 (1992), 03/25/92
ROBINSON v. SHELL OIL CO. , 519 U.S. 337 (1997), 02/18/97
ROUSEY, RICHARD G., ET UX. v. JACOWAY, JILL R. , 544 U.S. 320 (2005), 04/04/05
RUBIN, SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY v. COORS BREWING CO. , 514 U.S. 476 (1995), 04/19/95
SCHRIRO, DIR., AZ DOC v. LANDRIGAN, JEFFREY T. , , 05/14/07
SCHWAB, WILLIAM G. v. REILLY, NADEJDA , , 06/17/10
SHANNON v. UNITED STATES , 512 U.S. 573 (1994), 06/24/94
SHAW, ROBERT, ET AL. v. MURPHY, KEVIN , 532 U.S. 223 (2001), 04/18/01
SIMS, JUATASSA v. APFEL, COMM'R, SOCIAL SEC. , 530 U.S. 103 (2000), 06/05/00
SMTIH, WARDEN v. ROBBINS, LEE , 528 U.S. 259 (2000), 01/19/00
SOUTH DAKOTA v. BOURLAND, individually and as chairman of the CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, et al. , 508 U.S. 679 (1993), 06/14/93
SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT CO. v. MENDELSOHN, ELLEN , , 02/26/08
STAPLES v. UNITED STATES , 511 U.S. 600 (1994), 05/23/94
STEWART, WILLARD v. DUTRA CONST. CO. , 543 U.S. 481 (2005), 02/22/05
SWIERKIEWICZ, AKOS v. SOREMA N.A. , 534 U.S. 506 (2002), 02/26/02
TAYLOR v. FREELAND & KRONZ et al. , 503 U.S. 638 (1992), 04/21/92
TEXACO, INC. v. DAGHER, FOUAD N., ET AL. , 547 U.S. 1 (2006), 02/28/06
THINGS REMEMBERED, INC. v. PETRARCA , 516 U.S. 124 (1995), 12/05/95
TYLER, MELVIN v. CAIN, WARDEN , 533 U.S. 656 (2001), 06/28/01
U. S., EX REL. EISENSTEIN v. NEW YORK, NY, ET AL. , , 06/08/09
UNITED STATES v. SALERNO et al. , 505 U.S. 317 (1992), 06/19/92
UNITED STATES v. LaBONTE et al. , 520 U.S. 751 (1997), 05/27/97
UNITED STATES v. SCHEFFER , 523 U.S. 303 (1998), 03/31/98
UNITED STATES v. GALLETTI , 541 U.S. 114 (2004), 03/23/04
UNITED STATES v. OAKLAND CANNABIS, ET AL. , 532 U.S. 483 (2001), 05/14/01
UNITED STATES v. ATLANTIC RESEARCH CORP. , , 06/11/07
UNITED STATES v. RODRIGUEZ-MORENO, JACINTO , 526 U.S. 275 (1999), 03/30/99
UNITED STATES v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP. , 517 U.S. 843 (1996), 06/10/96
UNITED STATES v. BAJAKAJIAN , 524 U.S. 321 (1998), 06/22/98
UNITED STATES v. PATANE, SAMUEL F. , 542 U.S. 630 (2004), 06/28/04
UNITED STATES v. WILSON , 503 U.S. 329 (1992), 03/24/92
UNITED STATES v. ALVAREZ SANCHEZ , 511 U.S. 350 (1994), 05/02/94
UNITED STATES v. MEZZANATTO , 513 U.S. 196 (1995), 01/18/95
UNITED STATES DEPT. OF DEFENSE v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS , 510 U.S. 487 (1994), 02/23/94
UNITED STATES, ET AL. v. BEAN, THOMAS L. , 537 U.S. 71 (2002), 12/10/02
UNITED STUDENT AID FUNDS, INC. v. ESPINOSA, FRANCISCO J. , , 03/23/10
UNITHERM FOOD SYS., INC. v. SWIFT-ECKRICH, INC., ET AL. , 546 U.S. 394 (2006), 01/23/06
WADDINGTON, SUPT., WA v. SARAUSAD, CESAR , , 01/21/09
WAGNON, SECRETARY, KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE v. PRAIRIE BAND POTAWATOMI NATION , 546 U.S. 95 (2005), 12/06/05
WARNER JENKINSON CO., INC. v. HILTON DAVIS CHEMICAL CO. , 520 U.S. 17 (1997), 03/03/97
WASHINGTON v. RECUENCO, ARTURO R. , 548 U.S. 212 (2006), 06/26/06
WASHINGTON STATE GRANGE v. WA REPUBLICAN PARTY, ET AL. , , 03/18/08
WEYERHAEUSER CO. v. ROSS-SIMMONS HARDWOOD LUMBER CO. , 549 U.S. 312 (2007), 02/20/07
WILSON v. ARKANSAS , 514 U.S. 927 (1995), 05/22/95
WOODFORD, WARDEN v. GARCEAU, ROBERT F. , 538 U.S. 202 (2003), 03/25/03
WRIGHT, WARDEN, et al. v. WEST , 505 U.S. 277 (1992), 06/19/92
YOUNG et al. v. HARPER , 520 U.S. 143 (1997), 03/18/97
Click to expand...

OK, so perhaps I got a bit carried away with my "nevers", but this is only a list of opinions that bear his name. It is typical for the opinions to be penned substantially to completely by law clerks. Can you show which ones of these he actually authored or even produced a first draft? Nonetheless, even if written by his assigns he gets the credit for the work. But, he does subscribe to the notion of 'better to remain silent and appear a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.'

Does Thomas' silence thwart advocacy?
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

upsideguy said:
OK, so perhaps I got a bit carried away with my "nevers", but this is only a list of opinions that bear his name. It is typical for the opinions to be penned substantially to completely by law clerks. Can you show which ones of these he actually authored or even produced a first draft? Nonetheless, even if written by his assigns he gets the credit for the work. But, he does subscribe to the notion of 'better to remain silent and appear a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.'

Does Thomas' silence thwart advocacy?
Click to expand...


Just dies laughing, okay sometimes you have to be outside looking in at this sh*t …. first I start out with never … then have to change to hardly ever, then opps okay .. I was just plain wrong .. “BUT” let me change the pretext of what I was saying .. now prove me wrong again.
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

The Barbarian said:
Just dies laughing, okay sometimes you have to be outside looking in at this sh*t …. first I start out with never … then have to change to hardly ever, then opps okay .. I was just plain wrong .. “BUT” let me change the pretext of what I was saying .. now prove me wrong again.
Click to expand...

It is wrong to say Thomas never authored an opinion, he's authored plenty. But, as anybody who's ever read one of his opinions will tell you, it is equally wrong to say he isn't an intellectual lightweight.
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

Guy Incognito said:
It is wrong to say Thomas never authored an opinion, he's authored plenty. But, as anybody who's ever read one of his opinions will tell you, it is equally wrong to say he isn't an intellectual lightweight.
Click to expand...


And I am sure that his political detractors are the ones we should be relying on for that insight is that right?


j-mac
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

upsideguy said:
Possibly the dumbest guy (or prehaps just a guy with very, very low integrity) ever to take a seat on the court.....
Click to expand...

that sounds pretty racist to me

Thomas is much smarter than the man he replaced and had a far better academic resume

but let me guess

you being a world noted student of the supreme court studied the IQs and writings of every justice before coming to this conclusion?
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

Guy Incognito said:
It is wrong to say Thomas never authored an opinion, he's authored plenty. But, as anybody who's ever read one of his opinions will tell you, it is equally wrong to say he isn't an intellectual lightweight.
Click to expand...

edify me on how you are qualified to discuss which justices are intellectual lightweights

seriously
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

TurtleDude said:
edify me on how you are qualified to discuss which justices are intellectual lightweights

seriously
Click to expand...

+He read it, on a web site that Justice Thomas was stupid, because that's what he's supposed to think. Don't ask him to dig up some of Justice Thomas opinion's, he's never read anything by the man, just stuff written by others whom he trust to help him know how to think.
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

I do NOT think Justice Thomas is stupid, ignorant or of low intelligence. Thinking back to his nomination, a local newspaper printed a speech he gave to a school in which he discussed his childhood and his upbringing and I used in in classes I taught because I thought it was inspirational for children to read. I have never seen any problem with his intelligence and I have little doubt that he could not have risen to the heights he has if he were simply stupid.

It is very unusual and downright weird that he never asks questions from the bench and perhaps that is a cause for some to speculate about him.

My problem with him is his far and extremist right wing decisions which are ruining America like Citizens United and others. I hope that the attention his wife is getting and the ethics violations that appear to be connected with him regarding his wife and their income cause him to remove himself from the Court.
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

haymarket said:
I do NOT think Justice Thomas is stupid, ignorant or of low intelligence. Thinking back to his nomination, a local newspaper printed a speech he gave to a school in which he discussed his childhood and his upbringing and I used in in classes I taught because I thought it was inspirational for children to read. I have never seen any problem with his intelligence and I have little doubt that he could not have risen to the heights he has if he were simply stupid.

It is very unusual and downright weird that he never asks questions from the bench and perhaps that is a cause for some to speculate about him.

My problem with him is his far and extremist right wing decisions which are ruining America like Citizens United and others. I hope that the attention his wife is getting and the ethics violations that appear to be connected with him regarding his wife and their income cause him to remove himself from the Court.
Click to expand...

The Constitution is ruining America?

Madness. I think it's scarier that you are allowed to "teach" rather then anything Justice Thomas has done. Your views are extreme, your conclusions are suspect and your ideals atrocious.
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

MrVicchio said:
The Constitution is ruining America?

Madness. I think it's scarier that you are allowed to "teach" rather then anything Justice Thomas has done. Your views are extreme, your conclusions are suspect and your ideals atrocious.
Click to expand...

Where did I say that?
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

haymarket said:
Where did I say that?
Click to expand...

Justices Thomas and Scalia are fairly strict constitutionalist judges. You have great disdain for both men and their positions, claiming
My problem with him is his far and extremist right wing decisions which are ruining America
Click to expand...
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

MrVicchio said:
Justices Thomas and Scalia are fairly strict constitutionalist judges. You have great disdain for both men and their positions, claiming
Click to expand...

Looks to me like your putting forth an opinion of what haymarket said instead of what he actually said.Sad.:(
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

donc said:
Looks to me like your putting forth an opinion of what haymarket said instead of what he actually said.Sad.:(
Click to expand...

Maybe if we ask Haymarket what he meant by what he said it would be clearer then. Or, and here is a novel idea, be forthright in what you say and interpretation won't be needed.


j-mac
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

j-mac said:
Maybe if we ask Haymarket what he meant by what he said it would be clearer then. Or, and here is a novel idea, be forthright in what you say and interpretation won't be needed.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Comon j-mac. your better than this...go check the sentence that vic chopped in half.
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

donc said:
Comon j-mac. your better than this...go check the sentence that vic chopped in half.
Click to expand...


It's politics, stuff like this happens on both sides. But I would like to know from Hay, what is so destructive about having conservatives on the court. Does he believe that the courts should only be made up of one ideology? Or, is there room for all ideas out there?


j-mac
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

j-mac said:
It's politics, stuff like this happens on both sides. But I would like to know from Hay, what is so destructive about having conservatives on the court. Does he believe that the courts should only be made up of one ideology? Or, is there room for all ideas out there?


j-mac
Click to expand...

Not going to speak for Hay, but imo opinion I think that it is packed now too far to the right. Do we agree that law should not have any slant, be it right, or left?
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

donc said:
Not going to speak for Hay, but imo opinion I think that it is packed now too far to the right. Do we agree that law should not have any slant, be it right, or left?
Click to expand...


The only "slant" should be toward upholding the Constitution. However, it is a long gone pipe dream to think that politics of the Justices involved don't play a part.


j-mac
 
Re: Should Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, Elena Kagan Sit Out Health Care Ca

QUOTE j-mac
The only "slant" should be toward upholding the Constitution.
Click to expand...

True,i also would like ot add the law of the land as well.

However, it is a long gone pipe dream to think that politics of the Justices involved don't play a part.
Click to expand...



j-mac[/QUOTE]

Yes its sad that we have Supremes going hunting with Vice President cheney before hearing a case involving cheney at the time of the hunt.Then we have the same Supreme giving tea party…somethings, law classes. Kinda looks kinda slanted to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom