Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SCOTUS DECISION WATCH- Live Thread- 10am
Sun Times & AP ^ | June 27, 2005

Posted on 06/27/2005 6:51:27 AM PDT by RobFromGa

RULINGS ON MONDAY?

A look at the remaining cases of the Supreme Court's term:

TEN COMMANDMENTS: The constitutionality of Ten Commandments in public buildings and on government property, under the First Amendment's ban on an ''establishment'' of religion.

FILE SHARING: Whether the entertainment industry may sue technology manufacturers over consumers who use their products to steal music and movies online.

INTERNET ACCESS: A test of the tight control cable companies hold over high-speed Internet service in a case that will determine whether the industry must open up its lines to competitors.

DEATH PENALTY: A look at courts' flexibility to reopen cases, in an appeal that asks if an appeals court was wrong to order more study of a Tennessee Death Row inmate's claims.

RESTRAINING ORDERS: Whether police can be sued for how they enforce restraining orders.

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


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: establishmentclause; scotus; sodomy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-266 next last
To: volvox
...they believe this display was religiously motivated.

So we're into the 'thought crime' mode. Well, it's the same thing all those stupid hate-crime laws are based on.

121 posted on 06/27/2005 7:39:28 AM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

The reports about the opinion seems to suggest they felt the display was religiously motivated and that didnot change when it was redisplayed in KC.


122 posted on 06/27/2005 7:40:19 AM PDT by volvox (It is Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM Religion!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
Bush: "Ladies and gentlemen, I nominate....
AL GONZALEZ!!


You got it. That's exactly what will happen!
123 posted on 06/27/2005 7:40:48 AM PDT by demkicker (A skunk sat on a stump; the stump thunk the skunk stunk; the skunk thunk the stump stunk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: ken5050
BTW..Is Congress in recess?

Better phrased is: Are they working? They are in recess more often than not....

124 posted on 06/27/2005 7:40:51 AM PDT by b4its2late (I saw a woman wearing a sweat shirt with "Guess" on it. So I said "Implants?" She hit me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

No kidding.

I can't believe it since they seemed very sympathetic to the file sharing side at the time since they openly admitted *it can have legal uses.*

Yet, somehow they decided to rule against it anyway.

That is a flagrant move against Betamax, which said that even if technology could be used illegally, the people are responsible, NOT THE TECHNOLOGY.

They are turning that upside the head today.

Of all the rulings, this is probably the most dangerous.

Just truly appalling.


125 posted on 06/27/2005 7:41:21 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: two23
Looks like 5 of the 9 gods of the new Mount Olympus didn't want the competition in the same room. "Thou Shalt Have No Other gods Before Me Us"
126 posted on 06/27/2005 7:41:31 AM PDT by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse

If a law is unconstitutional for having a "religious motivation", we'd better strike everything that follows "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not steal".


127 posted on 06/27/2005 7:42:00 AM PDT by Luddite Patent Counsel (Theyre digging through all of your files, stealing back your best ideas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: b4its2late

They'll be working tomorrow when they fast track CAFTA!


128 posted on 06/27/2005 7:42:02 AM PDT by Roccus (The collective has started.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa

I think SCOTUS is giving us the middle finger.


129 posted on 06/27/2005 7:42:16 AM PDT by Recall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoseofTexas

What is your source that they have ruled against TX yet? I only know about the ruling in KC and my source stated that another ruling on TX was still supposed to come today but it wasn't out yet. Thanks!


130 posted on 06/27/2005 7:42:21 AM PDT by volvox (It is Freedom OF Religion not Freedom FROM Religion!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: NautiNurse
Too bad O'Connor didn't retire last Friday afternoon.

Was it O'Connor who betrayed us on the Ten Commandments? I want to know the breakdown.

131 posted on 06/27/2005 7:42:37 AM PDT by demkicker (A skunk sat on a stump; the stump thunk the skunk stunk; the skunk thunk the stump stunk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: volvox

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday declared Ten Commandments displays in two Kentucky courthouses unconstitutional.

The court ruled that in McCreary County v. ACLU (search) that the displays violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits government from endorsing or supporting one religion above others.

The justices, split 5-4, ruled that the Ten Commandments could not be displayed in government buildings or property. However, the Biblical tablets could be displayed in an historical context, as they are in a frieze in the Supreme Court building.

"The touchstone for our analysis is the principle that the First Amendment mandates government neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and nonreligion," Justice David H. Souter wrote for the majority.

Souter was joined in his opinion by other members of the liberal bloc — Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, as well as Reagan appointee Sandra Day O'Connor, who provided the swing vote.

The court also considered another Ten Commandments-related case, Van Orden v. Perry (search), involving a display on the grounds of a Texas courthouse. A ruling on that case was also expected Monday.


132 posted on 06/27/2005 7:43:14 AM PDT by RobFromGa (Send Bolton to the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

I'm reserving final judgment until I read the ruling, just in case they ruled against Grokster/Streamcast on some kind of technicality that doesn't much affect the big picture, but no matter what I am shocked at the ruling and even more so by its unanimity.


133 posted on 06/27/2005 7:43:18 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Justice Stevens is the most overlooked member of the USSC when it comes to discussion about being replaced.

He was nominated by Ford.


134 posted on 06/27/2005 7:43:19 AM PDT by Preachin' (Georgia finally saw the light in 2000.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
Wasn't the TX case brought by a BUM?
135 posted on 06/27/2005 7:43:48 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: volvox
What is your source that they have ruled against TX yet?

There is NO ruling yet on Texas.

136 posted on 06/27/2005 7:44:11 AM PDT by RobFromGa (Send Bolton to the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: All

Has anyone visited DU for their reactions?


137 posted on 06/27/2005 7:44:46 AM PDT by Chuck54 (Someone please ping me when Barak Obama utters an original thought.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

Yep.


138 posted on 06/27/2005 7:44:49 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
It's things like that which makes me consider going 3rd Party, even though it'll serve to bring in dims. I'd rather be stabbed in the gut than the back.
139 posted on 06/27/2005 7:44:51 AM PDT by Tree of Liberty (requiescat in pace, President Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: StillProud2BeFree

It's a sad, sad day.


140 posted on 06/27/2005 7:45:03 AM PDT by Velveeta (www.takebackthememorial.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-266 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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