To: Nachum
The Supreme Court made a bad judgement here. AT&T being one of the biggest crooks ever should never be allowed to do this as well as other phone companies. It deprives the citizens and rights.
4 posted on
04/28/2011 1:47:13 PM PDT by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
To: freekitty
Regardless of whether it was AT&T or any other corporation, the conservative side of the court seems to be the ones behind this decision. The Court's 18-page decision was written by Justice Antonin Scalia and joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas, who also supplied his own six-page concurring opinion. Justice Steven Breyer, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kaganby, provided a 12-page dissenting opinion.
8 posted on
04/28/2011 1:49:48 PM PDT by
Sopater
(...where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. - 2 COR 3:17b)
To: freekitty
arbitration clauses and jury waiver clauses have been successfully used to ELIMINATE any jury trial rights of an individual or class.
This is going to be particularly hard on drug manuracture malpractice.
16 posted on
04/28/2011 1:56:41 PM PDT by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: freekitty
“The Supreme Court made a bad judgement here. AT&T being one of the biggest crooks ever should never be allowed to do this as well as other phone companies. It deprives the citizens and rights.”
Your comment seems to belong on a different forum. I have no connection to ATT or any other mobile carrier. This court case did not involve a general assessment of consumer attitudes towards ATT. Your post has a very populist ring often reflected in the left’s view of the law. The court case involves a legal determination, not a popularity contest.
I applaud this decision. The Federal Arbitrtation Act has been in existence for a long time. California state law had effectively overridden the federal law by declaring that class action lawsuits must be permitted under the unconscionability or duress clause of the FAA. The USSC ruled that class action lawsuits do not override the FAA.
The particular case (sales tax on free phone) was utterly baseless. It is the government that acted in bad faith on taxes imposed on free phones, not ATT. The plaintiff should sue the government for imposing taxes on free phones.
To: freekitty
The court upheld the contract the people signed. It is a good call for contract law.
24 posted on
04/28/2011 2:02:59 PM PDT by
Ratman83
To: freekitty
The Supreme Court made a bad judgement here. AT&T being one of the biggest crooks ever should never be allowed to do this as well as other phone companies.If you are a conservative, you should be happy about this decision.
Instead, you sound like an emotional, anti-business, liberal troll.
30 posted on
04/28/2011 2:15:23 PM PDT by
Erik Latranyi
(Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
To: freekitty
It deprives the citizens and rights. What rights are deprived?
32 posted on
04/28/2011 2:17:53 PM PDT by
from occupied ga
(Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
To: freekitty
The Supreme Court made a bad judgement here. AT&T being one of the biggest crooks ever should never be allowed to do this as well as other phone companies. It deprives the citizens and rights. The supreme court made an outstanding judgement. f..k those greedy lawyers.
35 posted on
04/28/2011 2:22:48 PM PDT by
Donald Rumsfeld Fan
("Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." Richard Feynman father of Quantum Physics)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson