And now he's getting ready to overturn Roe v. Wade. Just one year after Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, Republican nominees on the Supreme Court are on the way to overturning Roe v. Wade. But they’re going out of their way to speak out publicly against the partisanship they’re actively engaged in.
Trump lost the popular majority vote by millions which is the landslide Trump
Lied about having for himself. Note how narcissistic psychopaths base their entire existence on lies? There is not an honest bone or conscience in their bodies, and they always blame their victims for the crimes they have done to their victims. That’s all Trump, and many psychopaths and sociopaths in every community. Lock them
Up and throw away the keys, they are menaces and terrorists to societies.
I agree with you 100%. I really hope I live long enough to see the importance of our democratic republic restored as a guiding tenet in all our elections and the leaders we elect. I believe the health of our economy must be considered in every congressional act, but payouts by lobbyists are currently the driving force, and lax fund-raising rules are just to tempting to the average elected leaders/candidates. The "big lie" would have died long ago if there weren't so much money being donated in it's name. Trump and the GOP are the evil dividing our country. It's horrendous to realize that it's all in the quest for money. It can't be their party platform - they don't have one anymore.
Yes, Robert Reich was never elected President or appointed to the Supreme Court; yet his gifts of explanation cannot begin to be measured by acronym titles.
You write that Justice Thomas, "When asked whether the attorneys presenting oral arguments ever compel him to change his mind . . . said, 'almost never.'" The only inference one can make from that comment is that he goes into the sessions having already decided on every case. Why should SCOTUS even have oral arguments if the justices go to them with their minds already made up? I hope/trust that it isn't true for all justices. In terms of the partisanship question, if Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett were not partisan, they would all have refused to be seated until Garland had had a fair hearing and been seated on the court.
That's the thought life of a conservative. They have decided that their ideology is true, and that any evidence to the contrary is either a distraction or a deception.
They are not conservatives despite the media calling them that. The right wing members of SCOTUS are religious extremists. The same goes for Manchin and Sinema, which the media label as moderates. They are actually DINOs. It’s important that accurate language is used to describe them.
Thomas is a reactionary, running on resentment. The last “Conservative” was Nelson Rockefeller. Thomas got every break once-LIBERAL America could offer. A truly wretched human being.
It was not liberals who had anything to do w Clarence. He goes against the grain of liberalism
Perfectly; sexual predators who destroy the human rights of women the clear and valid testimony that Clarence did goes against everything liberalism
Stands for. Because sexism
Is more dangerous and widespread than racism; sexism is also present in black and all
Other developing nations cultures. Racism is not everywhere but sexism
Is and has more
Ancient
Roots since the agricultural revolution, before which, women were the leaders of humanity for millions of years thru modern human
Evolution. Just look
At thr facts of prehistoric human life, and the leadership
Position was there in women, who chose the mates,
Chose where people in the group
Lived, and gathered over 80% of the food supply for their people. After agriculture is when males forced patriarchal
Rule which has been the worst most destructive form
Of leadership in humanity, that has been done on the suffering, blood and slavery of
Women and children. Science has found that not only do women make by far better leaders and we always have albeit oppressed and suppressed by males to not be allowed to show our superior leadership strengths, but science has also found that women are smarter in the most inept many areas of human intelligence, earning higher scores today in math science
And the typical communications as well, notably higher than males. Science has found that males blame others for what they males do
Wrong whereas females take om responsibility about their wrongs
As well as the wrongs of others. Females are found to put others head of self the first mark of a natural true leader, whereas males are born biologically predisposed to put themselves first over and ahead of others, making males the absolute worst people for any leadership
Position. The lease are all laws of science, founded in the correlation of hormones which cause behavior and exist in every person generations the same overall.
Nobody is claiming that Thomas is liberal. The claim is that his race, not his legal talent is what pushed him up the ladder. That said, he really endured quite a lot in his raising, and in his schooling. It took a great deal of persistence and hard work to overcome expectations and odds, that he is not a liberal, is truly perplexing.
I have read (and kind of experianced!) People that come up "HARD" and make it are oftentimes more severe in their judgements on others in similar circumstances that don't make it! Some mixtures of fear and survival guilt are powerful motivators so no wonder we are crazy!
As a 43-year-old with barely one year of experience on the judiciary under his belt, Clarence Thomas was quite young and inexperienced when George H. W. Bush nominated him to the Supreme Court in 1991. Thomas experienced a particularly rigorous and dramatic round of Senate hearings. A former employee at the EEOC, Anita Hill, accused him of sexual harassment. After the FBI investigated and returned with an inconclusive report, the Senate initially decided not to pursue the report and continued with the hearings. The accusation was leaked to the press, and women’s rights groups across America demanded that the Senate further investigate the matter. Anita Hill was called to testify in front of the Senate. Thomas denied all the allegations and spoke out against the unprofessional nature of the proceedings. Eventually, the Senate confirmed Thomas in October 1991 by the narrowest margin in a century.
I agree with this big and deep picture analysis of our present conditions that have evolved into a rather pathological state of affairs under ego driven male leadership.
And that all the Good Thoughts have already been thunk, most all of them over 200 years ago and committed to the Holy Texts, relieving us of the burden of thinking or even listening.
Very good point. Now, Clarence so staunch and pompous without a bending ear even when the truth is blaring right into this ears. He fails at every level while grinding his girth further into the ground. It's amazing that his wife wasn't called out on the carpet for funding the cattle to the Capitol Market to slaughter all the Dems. Repubs say those were only tourists and this I do fear because it is very queer that those tourist brought with them canisters of bear spray and and a make shift gallows to hang Pence and Peloci. Tourists like this I never met. They should have just all stayed home and wouldn't have been arrested. The Dems need to be clearer in their stance and represent the true majority and not the big business to whom they owe their authority.
I must say that I believe for almost all judges almost all the time if the case has been very well briefed and the judge has done his/her own research it is unlikely for oral argument to change their minds but of course it may happen in rare cases. I wonder if any research has been done on this? Maybe Mr. Reich could tell us if any such studies exist.
What I was saying. He mentioned “her own research” by that she is trying to play GOD. Instead of her own research on bullshit it should be what really it is and lost views not some one who already decided law over us
Well, let me explain it to you. A judge gets a brief from all parties, who cite cases and their argument. The judge, then researches those authorities to see if they are persuasive. That’s what I mean when a judge does their own research. There may be an opening at Fox News for you.
I absolutely hate saying this and I probably will get a lot of heat for doing so, but based on Merrick Garland’s ability to deal with the situation at hand, that being January 6 and his ability to enforce his Contempt citations, perhaps it was a better idea that he was NOT appointed. A justice on the Supreme Court needs to make a firm decision within a certain amount of time.
Oral arguments are more of a traditional formality than a necessity at the supreme court level. Can all the Justices read? If so, then everything one needs is in the briefs.
Absolutely. I cannot understand why Biden is being such a gentleman about fighting Republicans. Certainly the Republicans have no such qualms. The filibuster and voting restriction laws passed by Republican States should be addressed immediately, strongly and vehemently.
Not to mention the maneuvering around Roe vs. Wade by the southern states
and the Supreme Court's refusal to address the issue because it is "too complicated"
Biden needs to step up and aggressively confront the Republicans taking a few plays out of their playbook. Never mind this "reach across the aisle bs" The Republicans historically do not honor their words
By being nice, the Republicans cheated the Democrats on the Supreme Court's appointment of two Justices
Congress is now a self-serving Aristocracy and justices behave like Demi-Gods. After two and a half centuries our government structure is antiquated and unable to respond in real time to 650-million citizens or cope with massive technological change. Civilizations always end due to corruption or catastrophic environmental events. Now we are faced with both. I agree with Bill Gates that it is Women who can save the world. Time to unleash our superpower globally to bring balance to decision-making and practicality to economic measures. Our home is Planet Earth and Women are the most capable managers of Home. Quit the wars, take care of the children, feed and shelter everyone, keep everyone healthy, educate for civility and quit gaming the system. If not, American democracy will end as a near miss.
Science does support your mentality on women; laws of science state: 1) men are found to be born selfish, w the biological predisposition of putting themselves ahead of others whereas women are born selfless in the same
Terms, to put others ahead of self, the first mark of a true natural leader. 2) men blame others for what men do whereas women blame themselves for not only what they do but what others do as well, also a true leadership
Quality 3) women consider all perspectives equally whereas men consider only their own perspective and if after that only those Of others like them (men). 4) the most basic definition of selfish is “evil”
And selfless is “good,” which basically destroys everything any major religion has ever written or spoken about blaming women
For men’s anti human selfish behavior. Adam and Eve is a lie, for example, that men spun to ensure that men would
Always be able
To control women by calling on what has been written. Any written word by a male hand is the most fallible word on earth whereas women are found by science or be the most rust worthy dependable caring responsible human beings. These are laws of science based on hormones which are the same in every generation, and males have always had hormones that create criminal, anti human, destructive behavior which female hormones do not even begin to approach, even during PMS. Refer to the levels of male and female hormones in any month and you will see that the level of male hormones (that create aggression, criminal selfish behavior) is even higher than that of women at their highest, akin to a male
Version of PMS that is active 24/7 all the time, nonstop. Males have a hormone problem. Males also create over 90% of all crimes especially the most serious crimes and 90% of prison inmates of all time have been (always) male. This makes men the criminals of humanity. Men have no plz r in any leadership position and anywhere they are leaders is in
Dire risk of violating human. Rights and destroying peoples lives. It is men who destroy peoples lives by accumulation of all facts of science, making either prison or in position of follower and worker taking orders, the only viable option foe the sake of all humanity. The way it was for millions of years of human evolution. Any Hollywood production
Or otherwise that showed different clearly did not adhere to facts of reality. The other most intelligent creatures on earth are also under matriarchal
Leadership—bonobo chimps, whales, dolphins and elephants. This well precendented
Behaviors is not a coincidence and it is based on this that the human brain was able
To develop into the highest functioning Mentality and place on earth in the food chain. In control of and inspire of the control freakism, anti human power greed of males thats is the most dangerous mentality in earth.
I'm not at all surprised that Hillary was one of the brightest one in the room, her career has proven that over and over again. Nor am I surprised that Thomas sat quietly, we've watched him be influenced by power and not by Constitutional laws or norms. I find it telling that all of a sudden Trumps SC justice pics are crying we're not a "bunch of partisan hacks.” Their mere indignation only confirms that is exactly what they are. It really is time that we expand the court, we'll never rid political partisanship until we do.
I see a bunch of desperate, maimed women - if they survive their backstreet abortions. They can outlaw abortion, but there will still be abortions. Tragedy moving on the fast track.
With so many young poor living in the streets, adding pregnancy that is unplanned and unwanted is a recipe for more desperate poverty and all that comes with that.
Is largely destructive and risky to children—no one knows which child will be vicitmizef and which will
Be successful. Not a viable
Option for pregnant women who hold the strongest value in their genetics to make sure their children slate ensured success. Anything short of success is not an option is how women are genetically designed. This is the strongest genetics, women’s parental biology. The only biological drive men have beyond getting as many women pregnant as possible is to not provide for any child that is not theirs, because they are completely selfish, self serving and dont care about others lives without strings attached. Making men not true leaders nor true parents, as true parents give line unconditionally, which is weaker in males even when the child is part theirs.
There are many decent men who do not want to bring children into this world. They support Abortion laws that already exist. Don't forget that we have DNA testing now, unlike before Roe V Wade. Whether they care about unplanned offspring or not, they will be tracked down and forced to pay something for the child as the sperm donor. 18 years worth.
No human being, at any stage of life, is entitled to the use of another human being's body without their consent. Not even to save their life. If I don't want to give my blood, my kidney, my bone marrow, you don't get it. Not even after death.
Thank you for putting this into clear and revealing terms. Clarence Thomas continues to loom silently, covertly and obstructively over our national court of justice. His lack of transparency is the sign of a defensive and angry man who has shown nothing in the way of intellectual rigor, empathy or transparency during his 30 year tenure. Brett Kavanaugh looks like being the same for similar reasons, i.e. the very clear and credible testimonies of Dr. Anita Hill and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
There was definitely at least one witness who participated - Kavanaugh's elusive roommate. Apparently a great deal of potential testimonials were not followed up and included.
Thank you for presenting so many facts and tying everything together to make it understandable. I wish more Americans would tune in to what you have to say.
I am not a huge fan of Clinton. I do wonder if she would have governed less neoliberally than her husband who basically rubber stamped policies that crashed us in 2007. However anyone can see she is brilliant and should have been President. The fact that our country couldn't see the stark difference and selected an unqualified reality show con artist speaks volumes for our electorate. Jefferson once spoke of the critical need for an educated electorate. Well looks like we should have listened to him.
Not only is Bill Clinton brilliant; Hillary is too. Look what Bill did to the debt. You’re ignoring 8 years of the Cheney/Bush regime in bringing on the crash.
We’re hamstrung by the ghost of the Confederacy. We are not one nation. We are a geographical entity, cobbled together from wildly disparate social systems. A trip down the Eastern seaboard easily shows the problem:”small” farm country vs plantation country. “Dixie“ has oozed Westward to Arizona, where a “Latin” minority takes the place of plantation slaves and sharecroppers. Sadly, those States “punch above their weight “ in our ridiculously apportioned Congress. It’s an oligarchy thinly disguised as a democracy. Democrats win by 8,000,000 votes, yet can’t pass a law, or seat a judge. In short, more of a fiction than a nation.
That among many other things. Voter misinformation. Voter intimidation. Voter list purging. polls being closed or number of polling places inadequate for the numbers of people voting, Hours being limited for voting. long lines, voters afraid to lose their jobs if they take the time to vote. No Federal election laws guaranteeing codified rules and protection of voter's Constitutional rights. And more restrictive laws on the books than ever! WE NEED A REVOLUTION!!!!!
I was in an all male high school when Thomas was in law school. When Thomas declared at his nomination that he had never discussed nor had an opinion about Roe, I about lost it. We discussed it in high school. It was a pretty big thing. He was a law school. He is a liar.
"But if not personal preferences, where exactly do they discover the law? Thomas never said."
They will almost certainly tell you that they don't exercise personal preferences, because they follow the "higher calling" that is the Will of God. Because that's the easiest way to end any argument, just claim you and you alone (with at least 4 other Justices) know the Will of God, and that is somehow what the Constitution says is the proper way to interpret the Constitution, and not, you know, strict separation of Church and State.
Or, if they're not feeling up to being so brazen, then they'll tell you that they do not exercise personal preference, but that they follow and apply the law (which is subject to their interpretation, and so is subject to their personal preference, but whatever. The buck has to stop somewhere, and there's 9 of them, so you don't have too much chance of them all being whackos... until we let Trump start picking them.)
"When asked whether the attorneys presenting oral arguments ever compel him to change his mind, Thomas said, “almost never.”"
This sounds very prejudicial, as though he's already decided the case before hearing it. Someone ought to look into that. It would seemingly be enough to get a SCOTUS Justice impeached.
There should be the same number of justices on the court as there are judicial circuits. There should be term limits for justices, and terms should be staggered.
"Bill was never in class." Wonderful. That aside, the sociology is clear. Not even if a parent is the only possible organ donor for a child who will die without a transplant does the government have the right to compel the use of one person's body for another person's benefit. Only when facing the combination of a woman's bodily sovereignty, the cultural implications of a woman's place (as a physically and financially burdened mother), and the opportunity to punish her for having had sex -- only in this one case do we hear a cry for the government to override the otherwise inalienable right to control one's own body. Is it compelling that this is a unique circumstance warrants a unique response? "Yes", they lie, "because life is sacred." How many times must we say that these same people support war, sending immigrants back to countries where they are being killed, capital punishment, denigration of women who have children out of wedlock regardless of the consequences to her sacred life and that of her child, and ... even just school lunches for children living on the edge of starvation? This is entirely powered by the desire to see women disadvantaged, dressed up in what is actually a fictitious moral high ground.
No, it is illegal to commit suicide as well. Don't get me wrong; I am not against abortion but it is a personal choice (life, liberty, etc), not one of privacy.
You are mistaken. In some states it is illegal to ASSIST suicide, not commit suicide. Abortion is subject to privacy laws in the first trimester because it is a woman’s private decision before a fetus is viable. Even as a medical procedure it is protected as privacy.
OF COURSE judges have person opinions on every case they decide. Despite the mountain some of our Supreme Court Justices seem to think they're standing on, a mountain which takes them above such things, but which turn out to be made of cattle excrement, their timeless, eternal truths are actually based on things they were taught to believe, things which sometimes seemingly filtered in from the air they were breathing as they were raised.
The difference (and one that's absolutely missing in these "conservative" judges) is self awareness. An adequate judge needs to have examined their own ideas and ideals in great detail and sought to discover where and who those things came from. Especially important, they need to ask themselves the question: were those who taught me to believe these things aware of their OWN internal sources, or were they just beating into me (physically or verbally) the same perspectives that were beaten into them by those who raised them.
Did those who raised me and taught me what "truth" is seek to find the best, most objectively verifiable truths from which to work, or were they forcing me to believe a very limited, jaded perspective on "truth" and teaching me that it would be disloyal to some important institution or force to EVER examine or question that forcibly received "truth."
The healthiest among us grow up learning to examine our own ideas and ideals, regard even the best of them as human, and therefore deeply limited, and stand ready to take verifiably accurate new information into account and let it shape or alter what we have, up until that point, believed.
If we are not capable of doing so, then we lack the intellectual awareness, self awareness, and temperament necessary to adequately function as a judge.
I see no evidence that even a single one of the "conservative" judges is capable of any of these things. What we have seen is that when challenged to explain their recent decisions, each of them seems to move into a defensive stance and is completely unable to offer a single credible or logical reason for their choices. This is the sure sign of people who are desperately clinging to and trying to remain dedicated to an external ideology that would be unacceptable if they were to name it clearly (and which likely no longer makes sense even to them).
Sadly, they seem to believe that to betray that external ideology that was beaten (literally or figuratively) into them is to expose themselves to eternal damnation. Perhaps this is a "justifiable" religious position, but such people do NOT belong on the Supreme Court.
The next time someone tries to tell you that Hillary Clinton was a weak candidate, remind them that it took the RNC, Wikileaks, the FBI and Russia to narrowly bring her down in an election she won by nearly 3 million votes. ~ Stewart Safran
I think the decision was already made and strengthened when Trump lost
First. I think the Republicans cheated the making the last two appointments. Nothing seems more obvious to me.
The Republicans now know based on Trump's performance that after the protests of Democrats and the dust settles down that they can basically get away with anything. They will whittle away at the state level on abortion, voting rights etc. while manipulating the Supreme Court to work the other end. As they erode confidence in Biden, build enormous war chest they are hoping to overpower any grass roots attempt on the peoples part. They started with the mantra since January 6 with demands to impeach Biden. The can't even specify why.
One of the most depressing parts of that story is the fact that the most capable person in that class was never elected president.
...nor nominated to the Supreme Court
She got the popular vote. Can Trump claim that after two elections?
Trump lost the popular majority vote by millions which is the landslide Trump
Lied about having for himself. Note how narcissistic psychopaths base their entire existence on lies? There is not an honest bone or conscience in their bodies, and they always blame their victims for the crimes they have done to their victims. That’s all Trump, and many psychopaths and sociopaths in every community. Lock them
Up and throw away the keys, they are menaces and terrorists to societies.
I agree with you 100%. I really hope I live long enough to see the importance of our democratic republic restored as a guiding tenet in all our elections and the leaders we elect. I believe the health of our economy must be considered in every congressional act, but payouts by lobbyists are currently the driving force, and lax fund-raising rules are just to tempting to the average elected leaders/candidates. The "big lie" would have died long ago if there weren't so much money being donated in it's name. Trump and the GOP are the evil dividing our country. It's horrendous to realize that it's all in the quest for money. It can't be their party platform - they don't have one anymore.
Yes she should have been elected. She was most qualified whereas Trump Was not qualified at all
Yes, Robert Reich was never elected President or appointed to the Supreme Court; yet his gifts of explanation cannot begin to be measured by acronym titles.
THAT was the stolen election and Repugnantcans continue to win with lies
That was one of the stolen elections!
Totally agree. And that the one who said nothing sits on the Supreme Court.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34640834-down-girl
Agreed
Exactly!
Or appointed to the Supreme Court.
I blame the guy (without knowing) she hangs out with. Why? Hillary's time was 2004 v W.
Why? My reasoning. Bill advised H to wait until 2008 when she wouldn't have to run against W. Along came Obama. Oops.
Very telling point
You write that Justice Thomas, "When asked whether the attorneys presenting oral arguments ever compel him to change his mind . . . said, 'almost never.'" The only inference one can make from that comment is that he goes into the sessions having already decided on every case. Why should SCOTUS even have oral arguments if the justices go to them with their minds already made up? I hope/trust that it isn't true for all justices. In terms of the partisanship question, if Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett were not partisan, they would all have refused to be seated until Garland had had a fair hearing and been seated on the court.
That's the thought life of a conservative. They have decided that their ideology is true, and that any evidence to the contrary is either a distraction or a deception.
They are not conservatives despite the media calling them that. The right wing members of SCOTUS are religious extremists. The same goes for Manchin and Sinema, which the media label as moderates. They are actually DINOs. It’s important that accurate language is used to describe them.
A true conservative might change opinion on hearing good arguments.
An authoritarian does not !
Thomas is a reactionary, running on resentment. The last “Conservative” was Nelson Rockefeller. Thomas got every break once-LIBERAL America could offer. A truly wretched human being.
It was not liberals who had anything to do w Clarence. He goes against the grain of liberalism
Perfectly; sexual predators who destroy the human rights of women the clear and valid testimony that Clarence did goes against everything liberalism
Stands for. Because sexism
Is more dangerous and widespread than racism; sexism is also present in black and all
Other developing nations cultures. Racism is not everywhere but sexism
Is and has more
Ancient
Roots since the agricultural revolution, before which, women were the leaders of humanity for millions of years thru modern human
Evolution. Just look
At thr facts of prehistoric human life, and the leadership
Position was there in women, who chose the mates,
Chose where people in the group
Lived, and gathered over 80% of the food supply for their people. After agriculture is when males forced patriarchal
Rule which has been the worst most destructive form
Of leadership in humanity, that has been done on the suffering, blood and slavery of
Women and children. Science has found that not only do women make by far better leaders and we always have albeit oppressed and suppressed by males to not be allowed to show our superior leadership strengths, but science has also found that women are smarter in the most inept many areas of human intelligence, earning higher scores today in math science
And the typical communications as well, notably higher than males. Science has found that males blame others for what they males do
Wrong whereas females take om responsibility about their wrongs
As well as the wrongs of others. Females are found to put others head of self the first mark of a natural true leader, whereas males are born biologically predisposed to put themselves first over and ahead of others, making males the absolute worst people for any leadership
Position. The lease are all laws of science, founded in the correlation of hormones which cause behavior and exist in every person generations the same overall.
Nobody is claiming that Thomas is liberal. The claim is that his race, not his legal talent is what pushed him up the ladder. That said, he really endured quite a lot in his raising, and in his schooling. It took a great deal of persistence and hard work to overcome expectations and odds, that he is not a liberal, is truly perplexing.
I have read (and kind of experianced!) People that come up "HARD" and make it are oftentimes more severe in their judgements on others in similar circumstances that don't make it! Some mixtures of fear and survival guilt are powerful motivators so no wonder we are crazy!
I would rather say his Republicañ connections delivered the job of Supreme Court to him despite being mentally unsuitable.
https://www.oyez.org/justices/clarence_thomas
As a 43-year-old with barely one year of experience on the judiciary under his belt, Clarence Thomas was quite young and inexperienced when George H. W. Bush nominated him to the Supreme Court in 1991. Thomas experienced a particularly rigorous and dramatic round of Senate hearings. A former employee at the EEOC, Anita Hill, accused him of sexual harassment. After the FBI investigated and returned with an inconclusive report, the Senate initially decided not to pursue the report and continued with the hearings. The accusation was leaked to the press, and women’s rights groups across America demanded that the Senate further investigate the matter. Anita Hill was called to testify in front of the Senate. Thomas denied all the allegations and spoke out against the unprofessional nature of the proceedings. Eventually, the Senate confirmed Thomas in October 1991 by the narrowest margin in a century.
Clarence Thomas is a paradox.
I agree with this big and deep picture analysis of our present conditions that have evolved into a rather pathological state of affairs under ego driven male leadership.
And that all the Good Thoughts have already been thunk, most all of them over 200 years ago and committed to the Holy Texts, relieving us of the burden of thinking or even listening.
Very good point. Now, Clarence so staunch and pompous without a bending ear even when the truth is blaring right into this ears. He fails at every level while grinding his girth further into the ground. It's amazing that his wife wasn't called out on the carpet for funding the cattle to the Capitol Market to slaughter all the Dems. Repubs say those were only tourists and this I do fear because it is very queer that those tourist brought with them canisters of bear spray and and a make shift gallows to hang Pence and Peloci. Tourists like this I never met. They should have just all stayed home and wouldn't have been arrested. The Dems need to be clearer in their stance and represent the true majority and not the big business to whom they owe their authority.
i wonder about that too. why we never heard about this report about her wife again during the insurrection.
I read Seth Abramson on Substack. He told us, and the J6C was getting his texts.
Ginni was uncooperative with them, unfortunately.
I expected it from her.
YUP Tourists like on the Attilla Hun Tour Service for their Roman Excursion!
And this is why he never ask questions.
Indeed.
He will dance with them that brung him.
I must say that I believe for almost all judges almost all the time if the case has been very well briefed and the judge has done his/her own research it is unlikely for oral argument to change their minds but of course it may happen in rare cases. I wonder if any research has been done on this? Maybe Mr. Reich could tell us if any such studies exist.
Laughing so hard. No you are saying “I am playing God” OWN . Come on
What. And your point is...not clear because you are afraid to make it, probably because you suspect someone will disprove it.
What I was saying. He mentioned “her own research” by that she is trying to play GOD. Instead of her own research on bullshit it should be what really it is and lost views not some one who already decided law over us
Well, let me explain it to you. A judge gets a brief from all parties, who cite cases and their argument. The judge, then researches those authorities to see if they are persuasive. That’s what I mean when a judge does their own research. There may be an opening at Fox News for you.
The biggest mistake Dems have ever made is going along with Thomas for Supreme Court. Black, on occasion, is not necessarily beautiful...
Begging the question, “Which oral arguments did you find compelling?”, etc.
They did not hear, or write opinions on the Texas abortion case did they?
Absolutely!
I absolutely hate saying this and I probably will get a lot of heat for doing so, but based on Merrick Garland’s ability to deal with the situation at hand, that being January 6 and his ability to enforce his Contempt citations, perhaps it was a better idea that he was NOT appointed. A justice on the Supreme Court needs to make a firm decision within a certain amount of time.
Oral arguments are more of a traditional formality than a necessity at the supreme court level. Can all the Justices read? If so, then everything one needs is in the briefs.
Same with Congress they already know the vote results before it’s taken
Very true.
EXPAND THE SUPREME COURT BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE
Absolutely. I cannot understand why Biden is being such a gentleman about fighting Republicans. Certainly the Republicans have no such qualms. The filibuster and voting restriction laws passed by Republican States should be addressed immediately, strongly and vehemently.
Not to mention the maneuvering around Roe vs. Wade by the southern states
and the Supreme Court's refusal to address the issue because it is "too complicated"
Biden needs to step up and aggressively confront the Republicans taking a few plays out of their playbook. Never mind this "reach across the aisle bs" The Republicans historically do not honor their words
By being nice, the Republicans cheated the Democrats on the Supreme Court's appointment of two Justices
You can’t change deep Dixie. And the Senate is their stronghold. It’s also the millionaires’ club where true democracy dies.
The south is where the most stupid anti human trash in the US live and hail from.
Yes
An expand it by a factor of 2 or 3 and then let it adopt a subpanel approach like the appellate courts. A larger court is going to be harder to stack.
Congress is now a self-serving Aristocracy and justices behave like Demi-Gods. After two and a half centuries our government structure is antiquated and unable to respond in real time to 650-million citizens or cope with massive technological change. Civilizations always end due to corruption or catastrophic environmental events. Now we are faced with both. I agree with Bill Gates that it is Women who can save the world. Time to unleash our superpower globally to bring balance to decision-making and practicality to economic measures. Our home is Planet Earth and Women are the most capable managers of Home. Quit the wars, take care of the children, feed and shelter everyone, keep everyone healthy, educate for civility and quit gaming the system. If not, American democracy will end as a near miss.
Science does support your mentality on women; laws of science state: 1) men are found to be born selfish, w the biological predisposition of putting themselves ahead of others whereas women are born selfless in the same
Terms, to put others ahead of self, the first mark of a true natural leader. 2) men blame others for what men do whereas women blame themselves for not only what they do but what others do as well, also a true leadership
Quality 3) women consider all perspectives equally whereas men consider only their own perspective and if after that only those Of others like them (men). 4) the most basic definition of selfish is “evil”
And selfless is “good,” which basically destroys everything any major religion has ever written or spoken about blaming women
For men’s anti human selfish behavior. Adam and Eve is a lie, for example, that men spun to ensure that men would
Always be able
To control women by calling on what has been written. Any written word by a male hand is the most fallible word on earth whereas women are found by science or be the most rust worthy dependable caring responsible human beings. These are laws of science based on hormones which are the same in every generation, and males have always had hormones that create criminal, anti human, destructive behavior which female hormones do not even begin to approach, even during PMS. Refer to the levels of male and female hormones in any month and you will see that the level of male hormones (that create aggression, criminal selfish behavior) is even higher than that of women at their highest, akin to a male
Version of PMS that is active 24/7 all the time, nonstop. Males have a hormone problem. Males also create over 90% of all crimes especially the most serious crimes and 90% of prison inmates of all time have been (always) male. This makes men the criminals of humanity. Men have no plz r in any leadership position and anywhere they are leaders is in
Dire risk of violating human. Rights and destroying peoples lives. It is men who destroy peoples lives by accumulation of all facts of science, making either prison or in position of follower and worker taking orders, the only viable option foe the sake of all humanity. The way it was for millions of years of human evolution. Any Hollywood production
Or otherwise that showed different clearly did not adhere to facts of reality. The other most intelligent creatures on earth are also under matriarchal
Leadership—bonobo chimps, whales, dolphins and elephants. This well precendented
Behaviors is not a coincidence and it is based on this that the human brain was able
To develop into the highest functioning Mentality and place on earth in the food chain. In control of and inspire of the control freakism, anti human power greed of males thats is the most dangerous mentality in earth.
These are laws of science,
Unarguable.
Ying/Yang
Alpha/Omega
Positive/Negative… Need Both
Term limits would be a better solution; expanding the court can be done by either party in the majority.
That too
Currently each appointment is too much of a prize.
The more judges there are the lesser the prize,
Yes. The majority of citizens will vote yes on this.
I'm not at all surprised that Hillary was one of the brightest one in the room, her career has proven that over and over again. Nor am I surprised that Thomas sat quietly, we've watched him be influenced by power and not by Constitutional laws or norms. I find it telling that all of a sudden Trumps SC justice pics are crying we're not a "bunch of partisan hacks.” Their mere indignation only confirms that is exactly what they are. It really is time that we expand the court, we'll never rid political partisanship until we do.
I see a bunch of adoption agencies brimming in our futures if abortion is illegal
I see a bunch of desperate, maimed women - if they survive their backstreet abortions. They can outlaw abortion, but there will still be abortions. Tragedy moving on the fast track.
Unfortunate truth.
With so many young poor living in the streets, adding pregnancy that is unplanned and unwanted is a recipe for more desperate poverty and all that comes with that.
and a bunch of dead young women who could not get real medical assistance.
Adoption and the foster system
Is largely destructive and risky to children—no one knows which child will be vicitmizef and which will
Be successful. Not a viable
Option for pregnant women who hold the strongest value in their genetics to make sure their children slate ensured success. Anything short of success is not an option is how women are genetically designed. This is the strongest genetics, women’s parental biology. The only biological drive men have beyond getting as many women pregnant as possible is to not provide for any child that is not theirs, because they are completely selfish, self serving and dont care about others lives without strings attached. Making men not true leaders nor true parents, as true parents give line unconditionally, which is weaker in males even when the child is part theirs.
There are many decent men who do not want to bring children into this world. They support Abortion laws that already exist. Don't forget that we have DNA testing now, unlike before Roe V Wade. Whether they care about unplanned offspring or not, they will be tracked down and forced to pay something for the child as the sperm donor. 18 years worth.
A woman should have the right to her own body. No one else should decide for her. Period.
No human being, at any stage of life, is entitled to the use of another human being's body without their consent. Not even to save their life. If I don't want to give my blood, my kidney, my bone marrow, you don't get it. Not even after death.
Amen!
Thank you for putting this into clear and revealing terms. Clarence Thomas continues to loom silently, covertly and obstructively over our national court of justice. His lack of transparency is the sign of a defensive and angry man who has shown nothing in the way of intellectual rigor, empathy or transparency during his 30 year tenure. Brett Kavanaugh looks like being the same for similar reasons, i.e. the very clear and credible testimonies of Dr. Anita Hill and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
It wasn't just Anita Hill. There were other women whose testimony was not taken or entered into the record.
Ford apparently had perfect recollection of a high school event no one else seems to have witnessed.
There was definitely at least one witness who participated - Kavanaugh's elusive roommate. Apparently a great deal of potential testimonials were not followed up and included.
Thank you for presenting so many facts and tying everything together to make it understandable. I wish more Americans would tune in to what you have to say.
I am not a huge fan of Clinton. I do wonder if she would have governed less neoliberally than her husband who basically rubber stamped policies that crashed us in 2007. However anyone can see she is brilliant and should have been President. The fact that our country couldn't see the stark difference and selected an unqualified reality show con artist speaks volumes for our electorate. Jefferson once spoke of the critical need for an educated electorate. Well looks like we should have listened to him.
Not only is Bill Clinton brilliant; Hillary is too. Look what Bill did to the debt. You’re ignoring 8 years of the Cheney/Bush regime in bringing on the crash.
Our country could see the difference but we continue to be hamstrung by an outdated electoral college system if voting.
We’re hamstrung by the ghost of the Confederacy. We are not one nation. We are a geographical entity, cobbled together from wildly disparate social systems. A trip down the Eastern seaboard easily shows the problem:”small” farm country vs plantation country. “Dixie“ has oozed Westward to Arizona, where a “Latin” minority takes the place of plantation slaves and sharecroppers. Sadly, those States “punch above their weight “ in our ridiculously apportioned Congress. It’s an oligarchy thinly disguised as a democracy. Democrats win by 8,000,000 votes, yet can’t pass a law, or seat a judge. In short, more of a fiction than a nation.
Republicans should not have been the ones who appointed the last two Supreme Court Appointments
That among many other things. Voter misinformation. Voter intimidation. Voter list purging. polls being closed or number of polling places inadequate for the numbers of people voting, Hours being limited for voting. long lines, voters afraid to lose their jobs if they take the time to vote. No Federal election laws guaranteeing codified rules and protection of voter's Constitutional rights. And more restrictive laws on the books than ever! WE NEED A REVOLUTION!!!!!
We did but our votes were not counted. Voters were purged. Gerrymandering is legal. etc. etc.
I was in an all male high school when Thomas was in law school. When Thomas declared at his nomination that he had never discussed nor had an opinion about Roe, I about lost it. We discussed it in high school. It was a pretty big thing. He was a law school. He is a liar.
I can't say I ever discussed it, but then I am guy; not my issue.
"But if not personal preferences, where exactly do they discover the law? Thomas never said."
They will almost certainly tell you that they don't exercise personal preferences, because they follow the "higher calling" that is the Will of God. Because that's the easiest way to end any argument, just claim you and you alone (with at least 4 other Justices) know the Will of God, and that is somehow what the Constitution says is the proper way to interpret the Constitution, and not, you know, strict separation of Church and State.
Or, if they're not feeling up to being so brazen, then they'll tell you that they do not exercise personal preference, but that they follow and apply the law (which is subject to their interpretation, and so is subject to their personal preference, but whatever. The buck has to stop somewhere, and there's 9 of them, so you don't have too much chance of them all being whackos... until we let Trump start picking them.)
"When asked whether the attorneys presenting oral arguments ever compel him to change his mind, Thomas said, “almost never.”"
This sounds very prejudicial, as though he's already decided the case before hearing it. Someone ought to look into that. It would seemingly be enough to get a SCOTUS Justice impeached.
The "will of God", what a nice cop out for them.
There is never anyone else there when they "receive" that.
I advise calling these "conservative" judges, "authoritarian" judges.
Their credo "My way or no way !"
This is what’s happening to this fam! https://youtube.com/channel/UC7iLdUzkL6PIx4xzYXAiVIA
https://youtube.com/channel/UC7iLdUzkL6PIx4xzYXAiVIA
There should be the same number of justices on the court as there are judicial circuits. There should be term limits for justices, and terms should be staggered.
I agree term limits are the answer, or at least a good first step.
"Bill was never in class." Wonderful. That aside, the sociology is clear. Not even if a parent is the only possible organ donor for a child who will die without a transplant does the government have the right to compel the use of one person's body for another person's benefit. Only when facing the combination of a woman's bodily sovereignty, the cultural implications of a woman's place (as a physically and financially burdened mother), and the opportunity to punish her for having had sex -- only in this one case do we hear a cry for the government to override the otherwise inalienable right to control one's own body. Is it compelling that this is a unique circumstance warrants a unique response? "Yes", they lie, "because life is sacred." How many times must we say that these same people support war, sending immigrants back to countries where they are being killed, capital punishment, denigration of women who have children out of wedlock regardless of the consequences to her sacred life and that of her child, and ... even just school lunches for children living on the edge of starvation? This is entirely powered by the desire to see women disadvantaged, dressed up in what is actually a fictitious moral high ground.
No, it is illegal to commit suicide as well. Don't get me wrong; I am not against abortion but it is a personal choice (life, liberty, etc), not one of privacy.
You are mistaken. In some states it is illegal to ASSIST suicide, not commit suicide. Abortion is subject to privacy laws in the first trimester because it is a woman’s private decision before a fetus is viable. Even as a medical procedure it is protected as privacy.
OF COURSE judges have person opinions on every case they decide. Despite the mountain some of our Supreme Court Justices seem to think they're standing on, a mountain which takes them above such things, but which turn out to be made of cattle excrement, their timeless, eternal truths are actually based on things they were taught to believe, things which sometimes seemingly filtered in from the air they were breathing as they were raised.
The difference (and one that's absolutely missing in these "conservative" judges) is self awareness. An adequate judge needs to have examined their own ideas and ideals in great detail and sought to discover where and who those things came from. Especially important, they need to ask themselves the question: were those who taught me to believe these things aware of their OWN internal sources, or were they just beating into me (physically or verbally) the same perspectives that were beaten into them by those who raised them.
Did those who raised me and taught me what "truth" is seek to find the best, most objectively verifiable truths from which to work, or were they forcing me to believe a very limited, jaded perspective on "truth" and teaching me that it would be disloyal to some important institution or force to EVER examine or question that forcibly received "truth."
The healthiest among us grow up learning to examine our own ideas and ideals, regard even the best of them as human, and therefore deeply limited, and stand ready to take verifiably accurate new information into account and let it shape or alter what we have, up until that point, believed.
If we are not capable of doing so, then we lack the intellectual awareness, self awareness, and temperament necessary to adequately function as a judge.
I see no evidence that even a single one of the "conservative" judges is capable of any of these things. What we have seen is that when challenged to explain their recent decisions, each of them seems to move into a defensive stance and is completely unable to offer a single credible or logical reason for their choices. This is the sure sign of people who are desperately clinging to and trying to remain dedicated to an external ideology that would be unacceptable if they were to name it clearly (and which likely no longer makes sense even to them).
Sadly, they seem to believe that to betray that external ideology that was beaten (literally or figuratively) into them is to expose themselves to eternal damnation. Perhaps this is a "justifiable" religious position, but such people do NOT belong on the Supreme Court.
Same holds true for liberal justices as well. In fact, Roberts is the only justice who seems to be unpredictable.
The next time someone tries to tell you that Hillary Clinton was a weak candidate, remind them that it took the RNC, Wikileaks, the FBI and Russia to narrowly bring her down in an election she won by nearly 3 million votes. ~ Stewart Safran
I'm in awe of you sir!
I think the decision was already made and strengthened when Trump lost
First. I think the Republicans cheated the making the last two appointments. Nothing seems more obvious to me.
The Republicans now know based on Trump's performance that after the protests of Democrats and the dust settles down that they can basically get away with anything. They will whittle away at the state level on abortion, voting rights etc. while manipulating the Supreme Court to work the other end. As they erode confidence in Biden, build enormous war chest they are hoping to overpower any grass roots attempt on the peoples part. They started with the mantra since January 6 with demands to impeach Biden. The can't even specify why.