START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Stephen J. Fortunato Jr. | Supreme Court Inc.


US Politics & Gov't  (tags: Supreme Court, Supreme Courtesans, corporatocracy )


- 2476 days ago - truthout.org
No relief from unreasonable searches, said a unanimous court, for a white couple that was rousted out of bed and forced to stand naked before police finally realized that the subjects of their search warrant were supposed to be African American (Los Angel



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Marian E. (152)
Wednesday December 5, 2007, 9:38 pm

Noted, thanks Mark.
 

Dave Kane (308)
Wednesday December 5, 2007, 10:34 pm
Yeah, thanks for reminding us of how quickly we're going down the toilet Mark {8'o)

And That's the real legacy we're stuck with -- the judges Bush/Rove have foisted off on us all.

And that's how this whole thing started -- the judges:

BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL -- March 3, 2003

Cynics might argue that it is understandable that George W. Bush can't tell the difference between a democracy and a puppet government.

After all, Bush was installed as president -- despite having lost the election by more than a half a million votes -- by a 5-4 vote instigated by a partisan hack Supreme Court Justice who thinks he is a judicial agent of God (we're talking about Antonin Scalia here). Bush's presidential "appointment" was the crowning culmination of a long-term right wing strategy aimed at controlling America through packing the courts and hijacking the electoral process.

Just as the Bush Cartel is going to seize the second largest oil fields and colonize the Middle East -- Hell or high water -- the right wing extremists were going to place their puppet in the White House in 2000 no matter what it took.

http://www.buzzflash.com/editorial/03/03/03.html
 

BMutiny TCorporationsEvil (467)
Wednesday December 5, 2007, 11:37 pm
IT IS ALL ABOUT THE CRIMINAL, ANTI-SOCIAL CAPITALIST ECONOMIC SYSTEM.
WE NEED SOCIALISM.

DON'T BELIEVE THE BRAINWASHING WE ALL WERE SUBJECTED TO IN SCHOOL AND IN THE MEDIA.
WE NEED A SOCIALIST SYSTEM OF FAIR ECONOMIC DISTRIBUTION OF RESOURCES;
NOT THE WEALTHY WEIGHING DOWN THEIR END OF THE SCALES OF JUSTICE.

"The current justices are especially in lockstep with their endorsement of the existing economic order and their insensitivity to the problems of the poor and the middle class. While the Supreme Court has no mandate to redesign the economy, there are many instances where constitutional and statutory interpretation allow justices to use their discretion to choose between the predator and the prey. The Bush-Roberts Court hunts with the predator.

In 2007, in Long Island Care at Home Ltd. v. Coke, the Supreme Court unanimously held that ambiguous Department of Labor regulations exempted hundreds of thousands of home healthcare workers (mostly women) from minimum wage protection.

In a 2006 opinion for a unanimous court written by Roberts, the former corporate litigator, the court told taxpayers they had no right to challenge the State of Ohio's tax abatements and investment credits extended to DaimlerChrysler. Taxpayers had argued that they and their communities would sustain injury because the less money DaimlerChrysler paid, the less money the state would distribute mandated revenue to its cities.

But Roberts and his colleagues offered a short lesson in neoconservative, supply-side economics: "The very point of the tax benefits is to spur economic activity, which in turn increases government revenues." Apparently, the conservative activists of the Bush-Roberts Court have rejected the observation of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that "A constitution is not intended to embody a particular economic theory."

When the DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno case is read together with Kelo v. City of New London (2005) - a controversial case permitting private homes to be condemned so that the land on which they sit can be transferred to a private developer - the result is a population stripped of all defenses against corporate power. Workers and taxpayers cannot fight against corporations that take property for the benefit of profit-making, and they are just as powerless to seek redress in court when a town's officials give the store away to a corporation."
 

Joycey B. (750)
Thursday December 6, 2007, 5:33 am
Noted. Thanks Mark.
 

. (0)
Thursday December 6, 2007, 9:27 am
This is outrageous. This government is going to push it's citizens to a point where revolt and revolution will be our only recourse.
Noted with thanks, Mark and anger that this couple was treated so brutally by those who should have been protecting them.
 

Jim Phillips (3209)
Thursday December 6, 2007, 6:09 pm
This is, more or less, what I have been saying for several years now about the new "Supreme
Court". The Supreme Court has the power to change the laws that will, ultimately, effect this country and citizens for the next fifty years.

The only recourse is to ensure that the next nomination for the Supreme Court is not another "neo-con" type of person but rather that of someone who can be drawn from a human rights background.

Or, gasp... a revolution...
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.