Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court women lash out at birth control decision
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/04/politics/supreme-court-women/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 ^

Posted on 07/04/2014 8:44:43 PM PDT by chessplayer

Their unusually strident dissent written by Sotomayor said the Wheaton injunction threatened the credibility of the Hobby Lobby decision.

"Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word," Sotomayor wrote. "Not so today."

The point of the dissent? "It is not the business of this court to ensnare itself in the government's ministerial handling of its affairs in the manner it does here," Sotomayor wrote.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: 1stamendment; hobbylobby; judicialactivism; sotomayor
Flat out telling The One that the SC decision is meaningless and that he should just ignore it.
1 posted on 07/04/2014 8:44:43 PM PDT by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Three leftist dunces. Can you even imagine our country controlled by the likes of them?


2 posted on 07/04/2014 8:48:00 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Are they really admitting they agreed to vote one way in one case so that other justices would vote with them in another case?

Impeach them.


3 posted on 07/04/2014 8:51:40 PM PDT by savedbygrace (But God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Have we ever had a good Supreme Court Justice who was female? Sandra Day O’Connor was almost as bad as the three succubi we have on the bench today.


4 posted on 07/04/2014 8:54:54 PM PDT by Objective Scrutator (All liberals are criminals, and all criminals are liberals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams
Three leftist dunces. Can you even imagine our country controlled by the likes of them?

I don't have to imagine it. It's happening right now.
5 posted on 07/04/2014 8:55:35 PM PDT by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

Can Supreme Court justices be impeached? And, if so, under what circumstances?


6 posted on 07/04/2014 8:56:31 PM PDT by doc1019
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
In her confirmation hearing she told us straight out she was a racist sexist.

"Wise Latina"

Naturally, she is viscerally opposed to an opinion formulated by five rational, unbiased, and competent judges.



America demands Justice for the Fallen of Benghazi!

O stranger, tell the Lacedaemonians that we lie here, obedient to their command.

Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. (Isaiah 49:1 KJV)

7 posted on 07/04/2014 8:57:58 PM PDT by ConorMacNessa (HM/2 USN, 3/5 Marines RVN 1969 - St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in Battle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
It is not the business of this court to ensnare itself in the government’s ministerial handling of its affairs in the manner it does here …
And here I thought that the Supreme Court was supposed to interpret the laws in light of the Constitution and act as a check on the power of the other two branches of government.
8 posted on 07/04/2014 8:58:17 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
"Those who are bound by our decisions usually believe they can take us at our word," Sotomayor wrote


             

9 posted on 07/04/2014 8:59:02 PM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

A lot of outrage coming from the dried up bunch.


10 posted on 07/04/2014 8:59:21 PM PDT by dragonblustar ( Psalm 103, Psalm 37:7, Ephesians 6:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Sotomayor proves herself to be a true petulant mushbrain and legal (if no other way) lightweight who will vote with her ovaries instead of her self-called “wise” mind. (By the way, has ANYONE else ever spoken of her as “wise”? Just asking.)

She’s the very paradigm of an affirmative action appointment. And THIS, ladies and gentlemen is what we get when empower “diversity”...which, exactly like global warming, is the greatest unproven mendacious pile of liberal mush ever inflicted on a populace that was gullibly willing to give her a chance.


11 posted on 07/04/2014 9:00:13 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (At no time was the Obama administration aware of what the Obama administration was doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

The Left is all pissed that it cannot completely force its depraved agenda down our throats.


12 posted on 07/04/2014 9:04:41 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace
Are they really admitting they agreed to vote one way in one case so that other justices would vote with them in another case? Impeach them.

I don't understand what they are saying. The three Marxist ladies (members of the Supreme Court due to affirmative action) voted the same way for both cases (against the right of the individual and the right of life. Abortion uber alles for these folks).
Sounds like they are just having a snit fest.

As far as impeachment - would that we could. Of course Holder and Obama should be first in line, but the Republicrats will continue to give them a free pass.

13 posted on 07/04/2014 9:06:26 PM PDT by El Cid (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

There’s nothing more dangerous than a stupid person vested with power.


14 posted on 07/04/2014 9:07:09 PM PDT by Ray76 (True change requires true change - A Second Party ...or else it's more of the same...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Three simple words for the three battleaxes on the SCOTUS ...
GO SCREW YOURSELVES!


15 posted on 07/04/2014 9:12:57 PM PDT by WTFOVR (I find myself exclaiming that expression quite often these days!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doc1019
Can Supreme Court justices be impeached? And, if so, under what circumstances?

Any elected or appointed federal official who is not a Senator nor a Congressman may be impeached. That includes Supreme Court Justices.

The circumstances for all are "high crimes and misdemeanors".

16 posted on 07/04/2014 9:13:02 PM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: Ignorance on parade.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: okie01

TY


17 posted on 07/04/2014 9:13:54 PM PDT by doc1019
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: okie01

So low crimes don’t count huh


18 posted on 07/04/2014 9:14:19 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

Tough.

Birth control and abortion ARE NOT GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.

NOT.


19 posted on 07/04/2014 9:27:06 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

These women Justices are NARAL surrogates acting like politicians in black robes. God Save This Honorable Court!


20 posted on 07/04/2014 9:28:33 PM PDT by Steelfish (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer
Just wondering . . .

Does Obamacare cover fertility treatments for women who want to give birth but are unable to conceive naturally?

If not, where is the outrage from the feminists?

The choice to have a child just as much a woman's right as the choice to abort one.

21 posted on 07/04/2014 9:31:20 PM PDT by Jess Kitting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer; AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ..

> “It is not the business of this court to ensnare itself in the government’s ministerial handling of its affairs in the manner it does here,” Sotomayor wrote.

Yeah, I threw up a little too.


22 posted on 07/04/2014 10:06:41 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Attention Surplus Disorder

Diversity is affirmative action by another name.

Just like they changed “liberal “ to “progressive” because liberal became a dirty word, so too with affirmative action and diversity.

Soon they’ll need to come up with new euphemisms since the left has managed, as expected, to defile their latest monikers.


23 posted on 07/04/2014 10:07:26 PM PDT by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jess Kitting

In California same sex couples are entitled to fertility treatments - this is not a joke.


24 posted on 07/04/2014 10:11:06 PM PDT by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
“It is not the business of this court to ensnare itself in the government’s ministerial handling of its affairs in the manner it does here,” Sotomayor wrote.

A meaningless statement from a lightweight.
25 posted on 07/04/2014 11:08:44 PM PDT by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: doc1019

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase


26 posted on 07/05/2014 5:22:15 AM PDT by savedbygrace (But God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

But...but...but..it’s “settled law”!


27 posted on 07/05/2014 8:08:37 AM PDT by FrankR (They will become our ultimate masters the day we surrender the 2nd Amendment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson