Impeach the Supreme Court

Citizen Handbook | 6/24/03 | A. Paladin

[conway]

It is time to stop the Supreme Courts social architects. Articl III section 2 of our U.S. Constitution defines what this court has the power to make a legally binding ruling.

The first power is extended to all cases: 1.) In all laws and equity* arising under this Constitution.

Equity: Justice according to natural law or right. Specifically, freedom from bias or favoritism.

They are doing what they are there to prevent when they make a ruling creating favoritism by affirmitave action of any kind.

"A man who has been taught to know and cherish his God given Rights can not be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins." Ben Franklin.

A.Paladin

[conway]

You all should get a handbook.

[jimkress]

You mean you don't like living in an oligarchy?

[Jim Noble]

It's Congress' fault.

Article III, section 2 :

" In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make".

[1rudeboy]

There you go, posting the Article in question.

[squidly]

Incompetence isn't grounds for impeachment.

[Credo]

Could the Supremes rule on their own impeachment?

Don't like a law - make it up.

[Scenic Sounds]

I hope that y'all are giving some thought to what issues you think the Supreme Court should not decide for us. ;-)

[templar]

Equity: Justice according to natural law or right. Specifically, freedom from bias or favoritism.

Equity: "A system of jurisprudence collateral to, and in some respects independant of, "law"; the object of which is to render the administration of justice more complete, by affording relief where the courts of law are incompetent to give it, or to give it with effect, or by excercising certain branches of jurisdiction independently of them." -- Black's

Courts of equity are to give justice where courts of law are not able to do so. This is how the idea of "social engineering" enters the law; it gives 'justice and fairness' where the law does not or cannot (in the eye of at least one of the parties anyway). Equity law is a protection, in effect, against the rigidity and harshness of common law. It allows people to persue redress of grievances through the courts in the absence of specific "law". It all started back under William the Conqueror in England in 1066 and we inheritied it through the original colonies.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

People are just going to have to get used to the idea that we don't make rope anymore in America.

You can't impeach anybody.

[OldFriend]

IMHO, the Supremes handed President Bush a parting gift.

[wingnuts'nbolts]

Justice Sandra is a liberal who has taken a lot of heat for the 2000 election decision. She is about to retire. She wants to have a political life and status after retirement so this is her offering to the power liberals to whom she genuflects. This decison is unconstitutional! She knows it. She did what all liberals do, they equivocate. Abortion is murder, she knows it! But she is a liberal through and through. Can't retire too soon! Say goodbye Sandra!

[The Electrician]

I'm going to have to dig out my copy of the Constitution and my magnifying glass and take a close look at it. I don't remember having seen the word "diversity" written in the original text, but perhaps I missed it and will find it upon a closer examination of its words (or its penumbra)... < end sarcasm >

[sarasmom]

Ya'll should get a grip.
Affirmative action-preferential treatment-quota's were struck down.
Common sence was upheld.
No, I never went to college, and got me some higher edumecation.
But even such an inferior mind as mine, can clearly see that if such intangibles as "service to the community","legacies of family", and out and out paying extra money for the "privilege" of higher education can be a factor in admissions, so can race.
I dont see a problem in what SCOTUS decided.
They struck down extra entry points for minorities, just because the applicants are minorities.
They upheld free choice, when it comes to measuring intangibles.
Seems pretty fair to me, that if entry level requires immutable minimum academic standards,all start on the same playing field, and color/sex/crede is blind.
When you start winnowing the field, based on the totality of the character of the applicant, it becomes a bit more subjective, as opposed to objective.
Does character count, or not?
SCOTUS appears to have moved closer to the goal, that a person will be judged by the content of their character,not the color of their skin, at least in the realms of higher education.
Was that not the goal?

[liberalnot]

even when the conservatives put conservatives on the court, that's not what we get. time and again.

when liberals put liberals on the bench, they get liberals. and they get some conservative wannabe liberals.

[TheWillardHotel]

This and other events have convinced me that our goverment institutions are damaged beyond repair. Reform is impossible.

It can surely be said that Blacks and Mexicans are the preferred "citizens" of this country. That is the implication of the decision.

Whites are second class. As long as we pay taxes I suppose we are useful.

[ladylib]

Maybe we should just ditch the Constitution -- an instrument that has no meaning in today's day and age. Whatever happened to "equal protection under the law"?

If the damn US Supreme Court can't uphold it, rip it up. Don't pretend anymore. I don't want it to be a "living document," like Al Gore wants. Just rip it up. Be honest about it.

There's no where to go anymore.

[muawiyah]

Those two decisions looked quite familiar.

First off, we have a court full of lawyers defending the judgment of the lawyers at a law school which is in the business of making new lawyers.

Lawyers, unlike the subjects of many jokes to the same effect, really do stick together!

The other judgment has no lawyers involved so the Justices felt free to tell them to go away because "that's not it".

We've all had bosses just like that. For all the BS in the supporting opinions, I'm pretty sure there's nothing more in the decisions than what I've outlined above.

[freebilly]

There's no where to go anymore.

Just the sovereign nation of FreeRepublic....

[jackbill]

Hey, diversity is a "compelling state interest", unless you are talking about Howard University, Moorehead, Tuskeegee Institute and the rest of the "United Negro Colleges".