Elizabeth Warren Slams Supreme Court As ‘Subsidiary Of Big Business’

[DonViejo]

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) slammed the U.S. Supreme Court on Sunday as being too right-wing in serving the interests of corporate America.

Warren warned union leaders at the AFL-CIO convention in Los Angeles of a "corporate capture of the federal courts," citing an academic study that counted the five conservative-minded Supreme Court justices among the "top 10 most pro-corporate justices in half a century," according to Politico.

“You follow this pro-corporate trend to its logical conclusion, and sooner or later you’ll end up with a Supreme Court that functions as a wholly owned subsidiary of big business,” she said, as quoted by Politico.

The Massachusetts Democrat also struck a chord with labor by voicing skepticism about upcoming trade deals and criticizing Wall Street for throwing "everything they've got" against banking regulation.

full TPM article:
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-slams-supreme-court-as-subsidiary-of

[Laelth]

1. k&r for Elizabeth Warren. n/t

-Laelth

[onehandle]

2. Yep. Fundies think that they are on their side. Yet gay rights and abortion still stand.

This SCOTUS is about making the 1% richer and nothing more.

[rhett o rick]

3. k&r thanks for posting. nm

[DFW]

4. Brava Elizabeth for coming right out and saying it!

Let Alito mouth silently, "That's not true." His votes on the Court say it is only TOO true.

[Scuba]

5. I love Elizabeth for many reasons Her being so alone shows the hypocricy of her Dem colleagues.

[66 dmhlt]

6. We need MORE Elizabeth Warrens in the world!

[perdita9]

7. Warren can be counted on to speak truth to power

Most senators can't

[ellenrr]

11. no, Elizabeth Warren loves the pro-war agenda of AIPAC

you are all getting set to be fooled again!

how many times do you fool yourselves?

"Warren goes on to describe Iran as "a significant threat to the United States," echoing a key talking point of fear-mongering pro-war forces. She calls for "strong sanctions" and declares that the "United States must take the necessary steps to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon" -- a veiled endorsement of a military strike if Iran crosses the constantly shifting American "red lines." Perhaps the only option Warren does not endorse or implicitly support is diplomacy. Her foreign policy views are hardly distinguishable from those of her Republican rival, who also marches in lockstep with AIPAC.

The same progressives who refused to vet Barack Obama's views on foreign policy when he ran for president in 2008, and who now feel betrayed that he is not the liberal savior they imagined him to be, are repeating their mistake with Warren. With AIPAC leading the push for war at the height of an election campaign, there is no better time to demand accountability from candidates like Warren. Who does she serve? The liberal grassroots forces that made her into a populist hero or the lobby seeking to drag the US into a dubious, potentially catastrophic war? It is far better for progressives to grill her on her foreign policy positions before the campaign is over than after the next war begins."

https://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/02/26-8

in a few years, if she is elected (she won't be) but if she were, and she goes to war, like Obama is trying to do, you'all can tell me how "betrayed" you feel, how"angry", how "disappointed".

[Arkana]

8. She ain't wrong.

[polichick]

9. This one has giant ovaries!

[Norrin Radd]

10. kr