Well, it turns out I am definitely glad I took all those political science Constitutional Law classes in my “interdisciplinary social sciences” Bachelor’s Degree. I can actually understand when they are baffling us with bullshit. In all the screaming and yelling over the Supreme Court’s gutting of a state’s right to regulate the arming of its citizenry and a woman’s right to control her body, Samuel Alito’s other crime against humanity seems to have been lost in the shuffle. This happened on Thursday, in between Wednesday’s evisceration of the plain meaning of the Second Amendment and Friday’s evisceration of the Fourteenth, which all followed Tuesday’s assault on the Establishment Clause of the Constitution itself.
This is part and parcel of the monied elites’ fear of the common man. The radical right wants everyone who is “beneath” them to be policed into submission to leave only a pool of compliant economic resources on two legs. It’s a pernicious habit of mind, born of the slavers from before the founding of the Republic, and persisting among those who think they are born to be in control.
The only hope of restoring meaningful Constitutional rights is the elimination of the filibuster in the Senate. The sensible remedies for Constitutional violations established by the Court in the 1960’s could all be carried into effect through amendments to Title 18 of the U.S. Code and to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Such amendments are impossible in a Senste where the minority controls the majority. Time is running out.
TC, not being a legal scholar, forgive my ignorance. In seeing his use of "prophylactic" so often, it appears to me he is cherry picking case law and just trashing any he doesn't like. If this is the case and next he goes after Congressional authority as "prophylactic" as well, is he basically saying that nothing matters except for his own interpretation of what is "original" to the Constitution? Is he dismissing case law and legislation that has occurred over the past 200 years?
So let me get this straight. Clarence and Sam go and tell John to f*ck off with “control” of “his” court and hijack control. They then proceed to fill in rest of June with some shit of their own. So their clerks explain an erroneous meaning of Bowie’s words “Wham, bam, thank you ma’am” to them and they proceed to screw over half the population of the United States all the while randomly shouting “Gilead”. They also screw gun safety advocates’ years of efforts by arming more citizens especially if they are white and crazy and in NYC. Then they send corporations on a drunken summer binge break to anticipate the end of regulation and the planet imploding. Ummm, what else. Oh yes, they are seen tickling Betty DeVos’s feet, who is busy lunching with Ginni and discussing Amway, profusely thanking her for trashing public education and getting classical education private schools ready for lots of money and the promise of un-separating church and state by making prayer the mortar between the bricks in public institutions. And then, with just a few minutes to spare they go online to “Call a Bishop” and get 6 new red robes and clan like hats for the group picture of of the InJustices to have in every courtroom in the land. And, oooo, almost forgot because no one I know except TC heard that Clarence and Sambo treated Miranda to a dutch date but ditched her after liking each other better.
Just who in the heck put them in charge? Some of that stuff sounds like a bad originalist fable that left out modern amendments.
I’ll be golly danged. Sammy and Clarence thought we were in ‘da bed sleeping. But we were woke. Time to revoke their licenses. Law, fishing, drivers, whatever. Revoke and repeal the pernicious shit out of them, do not pass by the woodshed without stopping, unpack their treason and get 5 more justices on the court. Cancel culture at work.
The difference between originalism (or “original public meaning”—a verbal legerdemain to get past the seance of calling upon the Founders to convey their intent to us), and any other means of interpreting the Constitution is that with originalism you always know what the result will be. Or as historian Joseph P. Ellis said, “The great sin of the originalists is not to harbor a political agenda but to claim they do not, and to base that claim on a level of historical understanding they demonstrably do not possess.”
If you haven’t seen this speech from Sheldon Whitehouse about dark money buying the Supreme Court it’s worth watching. The disbanding of the EPA is next also
In your last paragraph, are you referring to the Supreme Court ruling on the non-delegation doctrine earlier this month? That is the one that could strip many government agencies of their regulations, their authority, their means of doing business.
thanks for this excellent homework, Tom. it's important because most of us don't even have the inclination to pay attention to these decisions that tend not to make it to the front page, but which are just as (if not more than) frighteningly far-reaching than the decisions that make the "front page" (or get any real attention) in what I think it's fair to call "mainstream media" (a term I've always resisted using for a variety of reasons, one of the main ones being that it means precisely--and only--what its user intends for it to mean). things like whittling away decisions like Miranda and Gideon (Henry Fonda PLAYED Gideon, for godsake) are every bit as consequential as decisions about guns or abortions (which--at least now--states can still pass laws about). the decisions you're talking about are very precisely aimed at undoing what are seen as the excesses of the Warren Court, and it's been occurring to me that, for those of us who had a chance to observe that Court's actions while they were happening, one undesirable effect might have been a tendency to take them for granted. it never felt like there was a reason to do so, since I personally never met anyone who had problems with any of those important decisions, which attempted to even the balance when individuals encountered the legal system. the problem with my last statement is undoubtedly that I've never lived for any extended period outside of New York City. now, THAT last sentence feels like a punch line. punch lines occur when you least expect them.
you always quote Hofstadter to superb effect. increasingly, it feels like his writings in "The Paranoid Style..." volume need to engraved in granite wherever there's space. would it be so terrible if every potential voter was required to read "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life?" of course nothing should but done before they bring back those Civics courses. during the time I worked in a Junior High School, I'd keep telling kids to ignore most of the bullshit they were fed by the Hucksters and spend a few days learning stuff like "How a Bill Becomes Law" because JHS was going to be the last time they have time to get some kind of handle on how "checks and balances" were INTENDED to work and maybe try to make a dent in this "divine inspiration" theory of What the Constitutional Convention Was All About. people outta know how and why it's so fucking pathetic to compare Roe with Plessy in the increasingly large realm of Vile Supreme Court Decisions. time to stop....I got too worked up.
I follow The Daily Maverick of South Africa, where ''STATE CAPTURE' is on every other headline. Seems it could be an appropriate term for what's happening in the US as well.
This is part and parcel of the monied elites’ fear of the common man. The radical right wants everyone who is “beneath” them to be policed into submission to leave only a pool of compliant economic resources on two legs. It’s a pernicious habit of mind, born of the slavers from before the founding of the Republic, and persisting among those who think they are born to be in control.
The only hope of restoring meaningful Constitutional rights is the elimination of the filibuster in the Senate. The sensible remedies for Constitutional violations established by the Court in the 1960’s could all be carried into effect through amendments to Title 18 of the U.S. Code and to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Such amendments are impossible in a Senste where the minority controls the majority. Time is running out.
TC, not being a legal scholar, forgive my ignorance. In seeing his use of "prophylactic" so often, it appears to me he is cherry picking case law and just trashing any he doesn't like. If this is the case and next he goes after Congressional authority as "prophylactic" as well, is he basically saying that nothing matters except for his own interpretation of what is "original" to the Constitution? Is he dismissing case law and legislation that has occurred over the past 200 years?
I just heard about this today.
WTF?
Jan 6 hearings paused until July.
So let me get this straight. Clarence and Sam go and tell John to f*ck off with “control” of “his” court and hijack control. They then proceed to fill in rest of June with some shit of their own. So their clerks explain an erroneous meaning of Bowie’s words “Wham, bam, thank you ma’am” to them and they proceed to screw over half the population of the United States all the while randomly shouting “Gilead”. They also screw gun safety advocates’ years of efforts by arming more citizens especially if they are white and crazy and in NYC. Then they send corporations on a drunken summer binge break to anticipate the end of regulation and the planet imploding. Ummm, what else. Oh yes, they are seen tickling Betty DeVos’s feet, who is busy lunching with Ginni and discussing Amway, profusely thanking her for trashing public education and getting classical education private schools ready for lots of money and the promise of un-separating church and state by making prayer the mortar between the bricks in public institutions. And then, with just a few minutes to spare they go online to “Call a Bishop” and get 6 new red robes and clan like hats for the group picture of of the InJustices to have in every courtroom in the land. And, oooo, almost forgot because no one I know except TC heard that Clarence and Sambo treated Miranda to a dutch date but ditched her after liking each other better.
Just who in the heck put them in charge? Some of that stuff sounds like a bad originalist fable that left out modern amendments.
I’ll be golly danged. Sammy and Clarence thought we were in ‘da bed sleeping. But we were woke. Time to revoke their licenses. Law, fishing, drivers, whatever. Revoke and repeal the pernicious shit out of them, do not pass by the woodshed without stopping, unpack their treason and get 5 more justices on the court. Cancel culture at work.
Salud! 🙋🏻🙋🏼🙋🏽🙋🏾🙋🏿🙅🏻♂️🙅🏼♂️🙅🏽♂️🙅🏾♂️🙅🏿♂️
The difference between originalism (or “original public meaning”—a verbal legerdemain to get past the seance of calling upon the Founders to convey their intent to us), and any other means of interpreting the Constitution is that with originalism you always know what the result will be. Or as historian Joseph P. Ellis said, “The great sin of the originalists is not to harbor a political agenda but to claim they do not, and to base that claim on a level of historical understanding they demonstrably do not possess.”
If you haven’t seen this speech from Sheldon Whitehouse about dark money buying the Supreme Court it’s worth watching. The disbanding of the EPA is next also
https://youtu.be/GssrgNfuZwU
I Liked this but hate what you revealed to us.
Holy crap!
I would like to know who is clerking for Clarence Thomas. ..........
I'm glad you took those Constitutional Law classes too! And that you remember what was taught. Thanks.
In your last paragraph, are you referring to the Supreme Court ruling on the non-delegation doctrine earlier this month? That is the one that could strip many government agencies of their regulations, their authority, their means of doing business.
A WaPo article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/10/29/supreme-court-just-took-case-epas-authority-its-decision-could-undo-most-major-federal-laws/#:~:text=The%20nondelegation%20doctrine%20was%20an,about%20what%20actions%20to%20take.
Blue states ignore supreme rulings while red states take full advantage. Will that be a union divided?
thanks for this excellent homework, Tom. it's important because most of us don't even have the inclination to pay attention to these decisions that tend not to make it to the front page, but which are just as (if not more than) frighteningly far-reaching than the decisions that make the "front page" (or get any real attention) in what I think it's fair to call "mainstream media" (a term I've always resisted using for a variety of reasons, one of the main ones being that it means precisely--and only--what its user intends for it to mean). things like whittling away decisions like Miranda and Gideon (Henry Fonda PLAYED Gideon, for godsake) are every bit as consequential as decisions about guns or abortions (which--at least now--states can still pass laws about). the decisions you're talking about are very precisely aimed at undoing what are seen as the excesses of the Warren Court, and it's been occurring to me that, for those of us who had a chance to observe that Court's actions while they were happening, one undesirable effect might have been a tendency to take them for granted. it never felt like there was a reason to do so, since I personally never met anyone who had problems with any of those important decisions, which attempted to even the balance when individuals encountered the legal system. the problem with my last statement is undoubtedly that I've never lived for any extended period outside of New York City. now, THAT last sentence feels like a punch line. punch lines occur when you least expect them.
you always quote Hofstadter to superb effect. increasingly, it feels like his writings in "The Paranoid Style..." volume need to engraved in granite wherever there's space. would it be so terrible if every potential voter was required to read "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life?" of course nothing should but done before they bring back those Civics courses. during the time I worked in a Junior High School, I'd keep telling kids to ignore most of the bullshit they were fed by the Hucksters and spend a few days learning stuff like "How a Bill Becomes Law" because JHS was going to be the last time they have time to get some kind of handle on how "checks and balances" were INTENDED to work and maybe try to make a dent in this "divine inspiration" theory of What the Constitutional Convention Was All About. people outta know how and why it's so fucking pathetic to compare Roe with Plessy in the increasingly large realm of Vile Supreme Court Decisions. time to stop....I got too worked up.
I just fell out. You have to listen to this. It’s Leigh McGowan, Politics Girl.
She closes with best line ever. It’s one of her 2-3 min rants.
https://youtu.be/nZ5fZq2Rvw8
I follow The Daily Maverick of South Africa, where ''STATE CAPTURE' is on every other headline. Seems it could be an appropriate term for what's happening in the US as well.