Sandra Day O'Connor announces retirement
The Supreme Court justice notable for her leaving a dinner party in disgust upon hearing initial reports that Al Gore might have won the presidency has announced her retirement from the bench. O'Connor had long been rumored to want to retire, but did not want a Democratic president to appoint her successor.
Nothing is better for thee than me.
I don't need to explain to you what a critical battle this sets up. Add to the mix the fact that Chief Justice Renquist is on his last legs and, well, we're facing the prospect of this illegitimate and radical administration getting to appoint not one, but two members to the Supreme Court.
To those of us that only pray for damage control until Bush is gone, this is serious, as it will have consequences that will far outlive the dark stain on our nation's history otherwise known as the Bush presidency. The Supreme Court already leans right by 5-4, so we're confronted with the possibility that it would become a 7-2 conservative court. I don't think that needs further explaination as to what effect that would have on this country.
More than any other single event, that could mean our country could be literally transformed into something it's never been before, and move even further into a corporatocracy with the force of law behind it. It would truly be a radical bench.
4 Comments:
Excellent Maybe...
You ponder how the right picks it's judicial candidates?
They actually have a rigorous system, complete with powerful well-funded groups and networks of conservative laywers. The central organization is the Federalists Society, populated by some of the most odious of right wing legal types, such as Ted Olsen, the lovely and charming Ken Starr, as well as Scalia and Thomas.
They actually have a long standing program to meticulously groom justices to share their radical interpretation of the constitution, which they consister "strict contructionism", but which is actually a perversion of what previous rulings have interpreted the constitution as meaning. And of course, it's like a fundementalist and the bible, they pick and choose and distort whatever section of the constitution they please to support their agenda.
The purport to KNOW just what the founding father's intent was when they wrote various parts of the constitution, and surprise! they meant things to be interpreted in a way that favors rthe adical corporatist fundementalist right wing.
I don't see how you're getting a 7-2 split though... Renquist is already on the right, so the only shift would be O'Connor, which would make it 6-3, right? And she wasn't exactly on the left before, but she wasn't on the right either.... hmm, that sounds like how its supposed to be.
QCI... I seem to be having a lot of mental lapses lately. Maybe I should go get an MRI. sheesh.
You're correct. I just wasn't thinking straight.
Hey, the Republicans think Affirmative Action is Bad... bad,bad,bad.
And remember, Clarence Thomas was the most qualified person for the court, the fact that he was black had nothing to do with Bush Sr.s decision.
Good lord. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Post a Comment
<< Home