rgbecker
rgbecker's JournalRobert Hubbell finds consequences in Supreme's Gun Love.
[link:https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/real-world-consequence|
" Over the past three decades, Justices Thomas, Alito, and Roberts protected the right of anti-abortion protesters to harass women entering medical clinics. Last month, those justices were joined by Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch in protecting the right of every American to carry a weapon in public. Protesters have now gathered near the homes of justices to peacefully protest the decision in Dobbs. Predictably, some protesters are armed—as is now their right under Bruen (allowing universal concealed carry for self-defense).
The justices were offended and frightened by the sight of armed protestors near their homes. They apparently believe that the First and Second Amendments do not apply to protesters directing their speech toward the justices. So, the Marshal of the Supreme Court demanded that governors in Maryland and Virginia stop the peaceful protests. The request from a federal official demanding action by state law enforcement is, to say the least, irregular. But let’s put that problem of federalism aside for the moment and reflect on the irony of the request from the justices.
One of the pro-Trump governors who received the demand from the Supreme Court Marshal responded by pointing out that his state lacked—wait for it—constitutional authority to stop the protests. See Joe Patrice in Above the Law, Supreme Court Officials SHOCKED To Learn That Supreme Court Rules Apply To The Supreme Court. As Patrice notes in his article, the Supreme Court Marshal did not act on her own; she was directed by a justice (or justices) who should have a passing familiarity with the Constitution.
In Dobbs, Alito wrote that the Court could not—and should not—consider the real-world consequences of stripping women of the constitutional liberty to control their reproductive choices. (“This Court has neither the authority nor the expertise to adjudicate . . . conflicting arguments about the effects of the abortion right on the lives of women.”) Having turned their backs on the real-world “effects” of their decisions, the justices should not be surprised when their decisions puncture the comfortable bubble that typically insulates them from the chaos of “the little people” who must live under the scourge of the Court’s decisions."
Robert Hubbell has an idea for getting control of the Supreme Court.
[link:https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/a-modest-proposal|
"Restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to those cases in which the justices who participate in the review and disposition of the cases (a) have no conflict of interest and (b) sign and file affidavits affirming they have no conflicts of interest. If a justice with a conflict of interest recuses themselves, the Court can exercise appellate jurisdiction. "
" Fix the Court has compiled a list of recent conflicts, including the following:
Justice Scalia attended Koch Industries-backed retreat in Palm Springs in 2007, a time when Koch was bankrolling several litigants with cases before the Supreme Court;
Justice Scalia flew on a private plane to stay for free in a $700-per-night room at the ranch of a businessman whose company had a case before the Court the prior year (Scalia voted favorably for the company).
Justice Barrett refused to recuse herself from a case involving Americans for Prosperity, which spent more than $1 million to help get Barrett confirmed.
Justices Alito and Kavanaugh met at the Supreme Court with the head of the National Organization for Marriage when it was appearing before the Court to urge opposition to the inclusion of gay and lesbian workers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Although the Court granted protections to gay and lesbian workers, Alito and Kavanaugh dissented.
Justice Gorsuch failed to recuse himself from a case involving Penguin Random House when Gorsuch had earned more than $650,000 from his book contract with Penguin Random House since becoming a justice.
It is debatable whether Congress can force Supreme Court justices to adopt an enforceable code of ethics. But the Constitution provides that Congress can restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the Court, as provided in Article III, Section 2:
[T]he Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
Congress has restricted the Court’s appellate jurisdiction in the past, and justices of the Court have repeatedly recognized the right of Congress to do so. See Joshua Zeitz writing in Politico, Opinion | How the Founders Intended to Check the Supreme Court’s Power. "
Land phone over Internet? Anybody have experience with it?
Which service? OOMA? others?
Would 3 mbps internet be fast enough to handle usual use?
I'm thinking of trying it out before switching my land line phone number to it.
Very interested in hearing how others have found it to work...problems etc.
Thanks.
I think Hutchinsons' tesimony about Rudy saying they were going to the Capital on Jan 6th....
Two days before, is the most important from Cassidy. It shows it was planned, not spontaneous. It wasn't Trump going off script when he told the crowd to head to the Capital. Meadow's refusal to go in to tell Trump to call off his RWNJs shows intent by the entire West Wing. Concerted, planned attempt to disrupt official government activity, to disrupt the counting of the votes.
The talk of weapons and grabbing the steering wheel is just icing on the cake.
The statement about Rudy's remarks shows planning and intent.
Gasoline prices: Difference between 1973 and 2022
Thinking back, it occurred to me that when the price of gas doubled in 1973, it seems like a normal response to the general lack of availability of the stuff. In 1973, there were lines at every station, at least at the stations that actually had gas to sell.
Now, in 2022, there seems to be all the gas anybody wants, yet the price again has just about doubled. Seems like some sort of artificial price increase. You would think the oil companies would at least make an attempt to make it look like the supply is limited so of course they need to raise the price! By the way, there is no talk of a 55 MPH speed limit and Pick up truck sales continue to out pace economical alternatives.
Carter's response to the lack of gas in 1979 was to set some MPG standards and put solar panels on the roof of the White House...now we have Biden asking for a gas tax vacation.
My move would be to ration gas based on population....ie; same number coupons for each and every American. Set the max price that a gallon could be sold and squeeze the oil companies by making that price low. If people would just get together and curtail their use, collectively, this driver of inflation would be brought under control. I think it could all be done by Biden alone using emergency powers. Remember March/April of 2020? Oil prices dropped to $0 because, wait for it, people stopped driving their cars and flying around so much. Amazing. Polluted skies actually cleared up.
Need another reason to regulate gas usage by rationing? Climate Change.
Please explain to me what Trump meant when saying Ivanka was "Checked Out"
NYTimes states Trump said Ivanka was "checked out" .....WTF does that mean? Is it some kind of Gangsta talk or?
Here's from the TImes:
WASHINGTON — Former President Donald J. Trump, long known for distancing himself from or tossing aside staff members who contradicted him while he was in the White House, discovered a new target on Friday: his elder daughter.
The morning after the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol played recorded video testimony of his daughter, Ivanka Trump, at its prime-time public hearing, Mr. Trump used his social media website to separate himself from what she had said and to say she was “checked out” during the final days of his administration.
In the testimony, Ms. Trump said she was influenced by a Dec. 1, 2020, statement by William P. Barr, then the attorney general, that there was no widespread fraud that had altered the outcome of the election. She testified that she respected Mr. Barr and “accepted what he was saying.”
“Ivanka Trump was not involved in looking at, or studying, Election results,” Mr. Trump wrote on his social media website, Truth Social, in one of eight messages he posted there in response to the hearing. “She had long since checked out and was, in my opinion, only trying to be respectful to Bill Barr and his position as Attorney General (he sucked!).”
I know some crazy nutcases in my area and I'm sure you know some where you are.
In recent years a neighbor's son went schizophrenic and intentionally wrecked his car and burned down his father's work shop but fortunately never got a hold of an assault weapon. Another neighbor shot himself to death and others acted in ways way out of the norm. Domestic abuse and disturbances are whispered about all the time. The neighborhood is extremely liberal and somewhat libertarian so people are happy to help out when called upon and stay out of other people's business too.
If this is any indication of a Norm across the country, there are lots of people who are apt to lose it at any moment. We should work hard to reduce the number of weapons and figure out ways to make it difficult to get a hold of one. If people were talking about hand grenades rather than assault rifles there would be no questions asked. People are in denial about the amount of death that can be inflicted with these high powered, rapid fire, get-them-anywhere rifles. Background checks and red flag laws will help, but much more will be needed to put a dent in the mass shooting problem.
People who are a little off, sick in the head or depressed are very susceptible to influence from others. The Right Wing machine members like Tucker Carlson and the rest, with their constant chant of hate and aggravation along with more and worse stuff available on the internet will drive these fragile souls to desperate deeds. Reducing availability of weapons is the only worthwhile path, in my opinion. We should work like the anti-abortion army to close down the gun stores and providers. Imagine protestors lined up outside the gun shows and stores like they do at health clinics across the country.
My response to those wanting Ukraine to concede real estate to the Russians.
We've all now read that there are those suggesting Zelensky give territory to Putin to end the Russia's current aggression in Ukraine. The Donbas has about 4 million residents and the Crimea another 2.5. Much of both areas has be reduced to rubble. Maybe a better deal would be for Macron and Italy's Draghi to pick several cities in their countries and still and good shape, to trade off to Russia. They could do this without the bother of losing one soldier or civilian or school or hospital and I'm sure Putin would be overjoyed and surely will be dissuaded from ever using his threats of Nuclear weapons and bad boys from the east to gain any more real estate.
Kissinger, of course, has nothing to give up so nothing will shut him up. His reputation is already in the dumpster and nothing will clean up his record during the few years he has left. His ideas in the 60's and 70's cost thousands of lives and many lost far more than real estate. I guess he thinks other people's real estate is of no consequence.
Satellites showing fires and hot spots around globe indicate where the fight is in Ukraine.
Here's a link to the FIRE maps used to track wild fires etc. around the world. Updated twice a day, the red dots show where the fight is in Eastern Ukraine as the Russian try to move south and close off the rest of the Donbas they so much want.
[link:https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/#t:adv;d:2022-05-07..2022-05-08;@37.9,48.9,9z|
Turn on the "streets" layer to get town names.
My take: Leaker was acting on direction of one of the justices.
Leaker was acting on direction of one of the justices.
What we know: 5 or 6 conservative justices voted to favor Mississippi in the case and an opinion writer has to write it up by June/July of 2022.
Turns out they are not in agreement as to whether to throw out Roe or simply allow the 16 week rule to stand. Maybe they can't get 5 to agree on one side or the other. Without the 5, the case is lost for Mississippi. Panic ensues and the deadline looms. More time is needed and the perfect excuse to push the decision beyond the deadline is to leak the arguments which would allow Roberts to declare a delay would be warranted. Alternatively, the leak moves the intransigent justices to move from the overthrow position to joining the 16 week restriction justices so the deadline is met and some 'progress' is made.
Am I right that there can only be one “winning” opinion while opponents can write as many opposing opinions as they choose? That the majority has to sign the one opinion.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Oct 2, 2006, 10:23 PMNumber of posts: 4,834
