Tuesday March 25, 2014, 12:10 am
SCROTUS (Constitutional VD) is my term for the Fascist Five Supreme Court Injustices, who almost always favor their extreme Republican ideology over our Constitution. Worst among them (along with Clarence “TEAbag” Thomas) is Antonin “SS” Scalia. In two cases coming before the Court today, I expect Scalia to renege on an earlier opinion in a most hypocritical manner. Ironically, even with opposite opinions, he will be as wrong now as he was then.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 2:45 am
"Scalia and his Republican Party would ignore the First Amendment by establishing a pseudo-Christian state religion and denying the free exercise of other religions."
It seems the word hypocrite was created (pun intended) to describe this, possibly the worse Supreme Court Justice in history, though Clarence Thomas rivals him, Scalia wins because he has no sense of judicial ethics at all. Most, if not all but this one, jurists refrain from speaking about issues that may end up before them. Not Scalia though, he travels the country during their extensive "off season" making speeches that tell hate groups and businesses, which are sometimes one and the same, exactly what he thinks of the issues of the day, and does not disappoint when they then manage to get those issue before the Court. His brand of justice is for sale and grounds for disbarment, why he is still holding a license to practice law is an injustice all by itself.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 5:10 am
If they rule that businesses can force their opinions on others (denial of access to birth control etc) – doesn't this get them further down the road of regarding businesses as people? Most worrying for everyone's freedoms!
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 6:05 am
There are 9 judges in SCOTUS, and they couldn't possibly all be corporate-loving pseudo-Christians, I hope. The four reasonable ones should be able to withstand pushing this judicial triple whammy through, in any democratic society I know of, that is.
It's a triple whammy because first of all legally making a corporation both a 'person', giving this 'person' the religious morale of its owners, giving this 'person' exemption based on this religious morale and then allowing to push this 'person''s religious morale down the individual throats of it's employees would certainly end up before the International Human Rights court in the Hague.
Second, even if SCOTUS were to declare a corporation a 'person' with all its foreseen and unforeseen implications, giving this 'person' religious exemption would contradict Scalia's ruling in 1990 "that the First Amendment "does not require" the government to grant "religious exemptions" from generally applicable laws or civic obligations." And the ACA is such a law. It already has exemptions for religious institutes, such as churches, but not for 'individuals' such as corporations ;-). Corporation owners can't have it both ways, i.e. be a church and a corporation.
So how hypocritical must Scalia get to go against his own ruling? We shall see.
And of course SCOTUS ruling in favour of this would be ruling against the constitution and the separation of church and state.
If SCOTUS would rule in favour of this, it would be a tremendous blow to democracy and justice in America and yet another shameful episode which will further deteriorate any standing the US has left in the world. I really keep my fingers crossed that it will not come to this.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 7:04 am
If these right wing judges rule that a business has religious rights and can force their views on employees then we should TAX ALL RELIGIONS, since they are in the view of the right wing nutters the SAME as businesses like Hobby Lobby. These dimwits don't seem to understand the concept of real religious freedom and the separation of Church and State. They are acting like the ignorant and hateful Taliban.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 7:33 am
I see this much as the anti-gay law they tried to pass in Arizona. And just like that mess, this one has the potential for disaster - I'd want a list of businesses that felt they were entitled to be exempt so that I could avoid them. Then what about groups like the Christian Science members or Jehovah Witness groups who have different ideas in their religion? It could be a huge can of worms. Hoping the other justices are not as bad as Scalia....
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 8:51 am
Pat A, yes it does, which alone predicts they will do it. I would gladly have Fred Phelps back if Scalia would take his place. Lona, five to four is still five to four. We can expect an immoral decision with four scathing minority opinions. TC, it would be news if Scalia were NOT going to be a hypocrite. This si scary and discusting, but not news.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 10:25 am
The Constitution has been under attack since Alexander Hamilton formed the First Bank of the US which by 1791 was 75% controlled by English Banksters. It was the very same enemy they had just defeated. It was these very same banksters who conspired to inure and thus control Lincoln through usurious interest rates during the Civil War and through their support of the States in hope of dividing the nation after the war's conclusion. Only Lincoln's greenbacks and the interference of the Russian navy dissuaded England from its dastardly deed. The English bankers in an 1865 London Times editorial expressed their deep fears that the US in controlling its own currency would pay off its debts; would become too prosperous and thereby in its freedom from usurious international debt set a precedent for all nations that would lead to the abolition of the monarchies and the power exerted by the intentional banking cartel. Even Chancellor Bismark in an 19876 interview confirmed this. JFK had the same idea in his generation. The dream had to die with both these men lest the status quo of the power base be upset and their global plans defeated. The public has become so fixated on who killed Lincoln and JFK that they have missed asking the crucial question: Why.
It has been a deliberate and incremental increase over the following generations today as we reach the point where the Republic is about to fall. Any nation that doesn't control its own cash is a nation that is bound and servile to foreign masters and doomed to slavery and desecration.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 10:29 am
Unfortunately they can all be corporatist loving pseudo religious entities beholden to foreign lucre and control.
Of course although the laws they pass serve not the people but the diktats of the internationalists our laws reflect those interests. We are nowhere near as badly of as England is socially and morally today but we're getting there.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 11:08 am
So many good comments.
Sadly, the idea of corporate person hood goes way back in our twisted,Plutocratic version of democracy.
Too bad that Scalia is not just another fairy tale construct, like the personhood of the devil!!
We are still under the thrall of the Reagan presidency, which is why it is sooo important to keep GOPers out of the White Hoose!
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 1:53 pm
I refuse to believe that a corporation is a person ..... until my state executes one!
I think Roberts, as distasteful as he is, still has a grasp of the Constitution and precedented law. He may be swayed to uphold the separation of church and state. Then again....who the hell knows with the Fascist Five.
I do know this, IF they determine that Hobby Lobby can use their 'religious grounds'....so too will a lot of companies. Slippery slope on steroids. And a whole lotta women (and the men who love them) boycotting their business and a whole lot of others.
If this truly happens, women will again be relegated to 2nd class citizenship, chattel and prisoners to their bodies....and their employers. I won't even start on what such a decision would do to other professions. Retail stores are one segment, think about it. Do they really, reallllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllly wanna go there with women?
Not even gonna start on Scalia and Long Dong......I need to keep my BP down.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 2:14 pm
He is not thinking about the rights or good health of women. He is completely involved in himself and making sure that you know what he stands for. He will never change.
The Supreme Court is a joke. People nominated that don't have the qualifications except to be true to the lobbyists that drop money into their hands. No matter their background they get to DC and change to fit in, not to do the job they were sent there to do. Along with all the people in the DC government, I believe the judges should be elected not nominated.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 3:05 pm
It will be good when he and the 4 others associated with him are no longer on SCOTUS. But if a Republican President is in office at that time they will be replaced with like members keeping this Corporate America.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 3:58 pm
You don't need a Scalia hypocrisy warning, you only need a warning when he isn't a hypocrite. Hypocrisy ia in his nature and rules his every waking breath. Not being a hypocrite is what comes rarely or never.
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 8:29 pm
I am reposting my comment because for some reason it hasn't shown up but I'll try again. I think that the Supreme Court Justices should have to recite every year the oath they swore to uphold when they were appointed just as a reminder.
"I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States; and that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Tuesday March 25, 2014, 9:41 pm
I will not be surprised if they side with Hobby Lobby, disappointed, but not surprised. When they ruled that corporations are people too that was the down hill slide of most of our constitutional rights.
Religions are not taxed. Individual churches are. Taxing all churches is unfair to those who honestly keep to their voluntary agreement not to make political endorsements under 501`(c)(3). Those that violate 501(c)(3) should lose their exempt status.
So far Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts appear to support the Republican Reich. Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Kagan appear to support the Constitution. Kennedy is the question mark.
Wednesday March 26, 2014, 8:33 am
I think in the future the word Hypocrite and Scalia will be interchangeable so there is no change there. The problem is that justice does not seem to be remotely serving the common good but more the vested interests. With outrageous comments both on and off the Supreme Court bench, where he has distinguished himself 28 years as one of its most extremist justices in a century. So it is no surprise there.
"Fremont was owned by a church which claimed that “in any marriage, the husband is the head of the household and is required to provide for that household.” Because of this belief, they had a very unusual compensation package for their employees — though Fremont offered a health plan to its workers, the plan was only available to “heads of households” which Fremont interpreted to mean single people or married men. When a woman became married, she was to rely on her husband for health care. "
Where would an adverse decision leave blood transfusions? There are some religions that teach that the only appropriate treatment for disease is prayer.
Thursday March 27, 2014, 4:21 pm
Wow so many great comments. Arielle and Gene have done a great job at stating what I believe as well. Is there no hope for justice in the Supreme Court? I really want to believe there is . . . . .
Thursday March 27, 2014, 9:51 pm
Thanks for the post, TomCat. We probably know the outcome, but it's always nice to have hope that they will actually follow the Constitution instead of their warped idea of how they think women should be subservient to them. The line for separation of Church and State is getting harder and harder to find.
Friday March 28, 2014, 1:59 pm
If the Supreme Creeps rule in favor of Hobby Lobby, that will be another enormous crack in a country that is starting to tear itself apart. More fuel for the flames of revolution - and I fear that it won't be the peaceful "We Shall Overcome" singing kind--
Saturday March 29, 2014, 3:05 pm
Lots of great comments here. Myself I'm sick of religion being used as the excuse to enslave and control women. Citizens should not have to give up their rights just to have a job and support themselves or family. This is still about controlling another human being. And that is a form of slavery!
Saturday March 29, 2014, 10:36 pm
Without a doubt, Justice Scalia is one of the biggest hypocrites our Supreme Court has ever seen. He is as dishonest as they come. He ignores the Constitution when it suits his purpose and uses it only when it agrees with him.
His far-right views show his misogynistic attitude towards women.
I would hate to be a member of his family.