SCOTUS Rules agains Sotomayor's judgment

[navyguy]

Another reason not to put her on tha SC.

[url]http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090629/D994CJI81.html[/URL]

 

[40Arpent]

I am LOVING it!!!!!

 

[Reverendbiker]

So blatant racism ISN'T constitutional? Go figure...

 

[Charley]

Guys, a 5-4 decison that racism isn't constitutional is nothing to celebrate.

 

[DCortez]

Guys, a 5-4 decison that racism isn't constitutional is nothing to celebrate.

Should have been 9-0. I was cheesed, to say the least, when I heard the vote count.


Here's how it was explained:
[url]http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/tobin/71792[/URL]

 

[navyguy]

Should have been 9-0. I was cheesed, to say the least, when I heard the vote count.


Here's how it was explained:
[url]http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/tobin/71792[/URL]

And with 4 conservatives, 4 liberals and one moderate currently on the SCOTUS that's what you will get in such cases. That's why appointments are so important and must be fought for.

 

[DCortez]

BTW, when my house is on fire, I don't want dummies coming to put it out.

 

[Jeff B]

Every year that goes by with the Pinko in Chief inthe WHite House makes a repeat 5-4 vote on cases like this less and less likely and the probably outcome negative for liberty, personal freedoms and constitutional rights.

Like it was said'

Guys, a 5-4 decison that racism isn't constitutional is nothing to celebrate.

Jeff B.