Archive for the ‘Supreme Court’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Texas vs. California Update for July 16, 2014

Wednesday, July 16th, 2014

Some other stuff bubbling up, so here’s a Texas vs. California update to tide you over for a while:

  • Former Calpers CEO Pleads Guilty to Corruption Conspiracy.
  • As part of his plea, Fred Buenrostro also agreed to testify to testify against his friend and former CalPERS board member Alfred Villalobos. Sing, canary, sing!
  • How CalPERs corrupts California politics.
  • Jobs are leaving California and coming to Texas.
  • Texas’ low-tax, low-regulation approach favors job creation.
  • How Texas compares to both California and New York.
  • Why California’s high speed rail boondoggle is still doomed.
  • Stockton’s bankruptcy judge may declare that CalPERS is just another creditor.
  • Bell City Councilman sentenced.

    • Tags:, , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Crime, Supreme Court, unions, Waste and Fraud | No Comments »

    Liberal Rage Continues Over Hobby Lobby Decision

    Monday, July 7th, 2014

    Despite musical advice from that big hit from The Princess Factory, liberals just can’t Let It Go. They’re still in a rage over the Hobby Lobby decision, or at least pretending to be in order to gin up their shrinking base in order to keep Democrats from being slaughtered in November.

    Jeffrey Tobin: “What we are witnessing is a liberal meltdown in which they have come to believe the First Amendment is a technicality that should brushed aside when it comes into conflict with the ‘right’ to free contraception.”

    For the political left, the concept of religious liberty has been re-interpreted as to only mean the right to be allowed to pray and not to live one’s faith in the public square. When faith conflicts with policy initiatives such as the free contraception mandate, they assume that religion must always lose. However, the court majority has rightly reminded us that the freedoms guaranteed in the First Amendment cannot be trashed simply because a lot of Americans want not only access to contraception but also think their employers ought to be compelled to pay for it.

    But to liberals, a decision that reaffirms the primacy of religious freedom is just the latest iteration of a Republican “war on women.” As a political slogan, that meme has been political gold for Democrats who believe its use guarantees their stranglehold on the votes of unmarried women. But as infuriating and wrongheaded the war on women arguments may be, what is really troubling about them is that they reflect a utilitarian approach to the Constitution that regards any of its protections as expendable if they are obstacles to a liberal policy goal.

    Clarice Feldman: “No, the sputtering, venomous and hateful hyperbole is attributable to one thing, and one thing only: the Court did not allow the state to bend Hobby Lobby to its will on their behalf. And that is what matters most to them.”

    All this rage is especially hypocritical since:

    Some 204 outfits favored by Democrats were granted waivers by the president from ObamaCare, which means their employees do not have the right to employer provided birth control. These include upscale restaurant, nightclubs, and hotels in then-Speaker Pelosi’s district; labor union chapters; large corporations, financial firms, and local governments.

    Women did not march through the streets to complain on behalf of their downtrodden sisters at Boboquivari in San Francisco which sells porterhouse steaks at $59 a pop and such. Apparently they are up with laws written on Etch-a-Sketch boards which the president can rewrite at whim. And their moral outrage is dependent on whether or not the employer is a Democrat crony.

    The whole “War on Women” is “shameless, baseless propaganda:

    In other Hobby Lobby-related news, Jonathan Adler debunks the idea that the Hobby lobby ruling was “anti-science.”

    (Hat tip: Instapundit.)

    Tags:, , ,
    Posted in Democrats, Supreme Court, video | No Comments »

    The Rank Dishonesty of Liberal Reactions to the Hobby Lobby Decision

    Tuesday, July 1st, 2014

    The liberal outrage machine was working overtime yesterday to see who could issue the most hysterical denunciation of the Hobby Lobby decision. Without actually, you know, addressing the language of the decision.

    First an foremost are the idiots who scream that the Supreme Court is “banning contraception.”

    In fact, the decision doesn’t “ban” any form of birth control, it merely invalidates the Obama Administration mandate to provide abortifacients against their own religious beliefs. Or, to put it another way:

    Second, it is amazing how few (if any) liberals mention how closely tied the decision is to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby was a statutory decision based on that act, not a First Amendment case.

    [Facepalm]

    Yeah, the Hobby Lobby ruling doesn’t involve the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, except for the tiny detail of basing the entire decision on the language of the act. Which it announces in the very first paragraph of the decision:

    The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) prohibits the “Government [from] substantially burden[ing] a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability” unless the Government “demonstrates that application of the burden to the person—(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”

    Finally, there’s the amazing ignorance of comparing not forcing a company to buy four specific types of birth control for their employees to a legal regime where a woman can be stoned to death for the crime of being raped:

    The stupid. It burns.

    Tags:, , ,
    Posted in Democrats, Supreme Court | 2 Comments »

    Supreme Court Strikes ObamaCare Abortifacient Mandate in Hobby Lobby Case

    Monday, June 30th, 2014

    The Supreme Court handed the Obama Administration yet another defeat today:

    1. For-profit corporations are persons protected under RFRA. (Pp. 16-20.)

    2. Closely held for-profit corporations are capable of engaging in an exercise of religion protected by RFRA. (It “seems unlikely” that publicly traded corporations would “often” assert RFRA claims, but no need to decide whether they can.) (Pp. 20-31.)

    3. The HHS mandate substantially burdens the exercise of religion by the Hahns, the Greens, and their companies

    Given the ferocity with which Nancy Pelosi fought for the ObamaCare language that enabled Obama’s HHS to impose the abortion mandate, I think this really is a stinging defeat for the left. No, you can’t have an abortion mandate. Not yours.

    Note that the text of the ruling “is based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and not the First Amendment. (In other words, this is a statutory decision, not a constitutional one.)”

    Here’s the decision itself.

    And for the Obama Administration:

    Tags:, , ,
    Posted in ObamaCare, Supreme Court | No Comments »

    LinkSwarm for June 27, 2014

    Friday, June 27th, 2014

    A small LinkSwarm for a busy Friday:

  • Evidently Obama wants $500 million to arm the Syrian rebels that we’re supposedly trying to fight in Iraq. Oh, the article says he wants to arm “moderate” rebels. Has anyone seen these moderate rebels? Who are they? Kurds? Oppressed Christians? The problem isn’t that they don’t exist, the problem is that the actual moderates seem to have forces too small to affect the outcome of the fight, and I don’t trust this administration on, well, anything, but especially on their ability to discern the difference between “moderate” rebels and radical Islamic militias from 6,000 miles away….
  • Welcome to the ObamaCare Death Spiral.
  • The War Nerd suggests that Putin is mucking around in eastern Ukraine less to take it outright than to keep it at a simmer so he gets to keep the Crimea without a fight. Also include this epic quote: “Tom Friedman, the Michael Jordan of wrong.”
  • Obama gets unanimous beatdown from the Supreme Court. For the 13th time.
  • Even liberals are turned off by Hillary’s poor, poor pitiful me act.

  • As Hillary Clinton gears up for a Presidential run in 2016, ABC decides to make one of Bill Clinton’s chief aides a network anchor. Lovely.
  • Hillary’s book sells more than 100,000 copies, but woefully short of what it would need to earn back it’s whopping $14 million advance…
  • “Did Obama Fail Black America?” Obviously the question mark is unnecessary, as the only question is whether that headline is one or two words too long.

  • Feminism: The Tiny Elite: “You don’t have to look far to realize that victimhood is the flavor of the moment in America. Deeming oneself a victim delivers an afforded reverence, especially if said victimhood is biologically based.” Today feminism is “a group working largely for the interests of elite white women.” (Hat tip: Instapundit.)
  • How the media discriminates against stories than indict big government.
  • Phil Collins donates his extensive collection of Alamo relics to the state. In fact, Collins is donating not only his existing collection, but stuff he continues to acquire. Three cheers for him.
  • Much like obeying the law, word problems are not Democratic Rep. Alcee Hastings’ strong suit.
  • Texas man told to remove American flag from his balcony because it was “a threat to Muslims.” Get a rope…
  • Far-left cartoonist Ted Rall gets the axe. I’m not sure there’s a violin tiny enough…
  • Finally, you too can own the screenplay to Manos: The Hands of Fate.

    • I hope to have a longer post of the kangaroo court trying Michael Quinn Sullivan next week…

    Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Democrats, Foreign Policy, Media Watch, Military, Obama Scandals, ObamaCare, Regulation, Supreme Court, Texas | No Comments »

    Fallout from the Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decision

    Thursday, April 24th, 2014

    The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of Michigan voters in banning Affirmative Action (i.e, discrimination based on race) in college admissions

    Conservatives and libertarians have a very simple position on racial discrimination:

  • “All men are created equal, and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.”
  • Individuals should “not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” (I’m going to assume that you recognize theses first two, slightly paraphrased quotes on their own.)
  • “Our Constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.” — Justice John Harlan, dissenting in Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896
  • “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” — Chief Justice John Roberts, in Ricci v. DeStefano, 2009

    • The liberal position can be paraphrased thus: “Racism requires racism, because racism.”

    What, you think that’s a bit reductio ad absurdum? Fine. How about:

    “Because the lingering effects of institutional racism continue to hold back historically disadvantaged groups*, the federal government must continue to impose preferential treatment for members of those groups.”

    “*Historically disadvantaged groups” are those that in pre-PC speak were referred to as “minorities.” Except of course, the Democratic Party’s current formulation excludes Asians from preferential treatment, resulting in systematic discrimination against them by colleges that practice Affirmative Action compared to less qualified black and Hispanic candidates.

    Left unsaid is when do we stop discriminating against people based on their race due to the “lingering effects” of racism? Why should someone born in 1996 (as those entering college this fall) be discriminated against due to laws scrapped three decades before they were born?

    It is also obvious that Affirmative Action sets up minorities to fail by mismatching them with institutions desperate for “diversity” where they will be at a disadvantage compared to brighter students. So someone who could have been in the middle of their class at, say, Texas Tech, is instead at the very bottom of the class at Harvard or Yale.

    Affirmative Action is a racist relic of bygone days and should be eliminated from a free, colorblind society.

    Tags:, , , ,
    Posted in Supreme Court | No Comments »

    LinkSwarm for April 14, 2014

    Monday, April 14th, 2014

    Time for another LinkSwarm:

  • By the standards of signing up the previously uninsured, “Obamacare may be headed for an epic failure.”
  • Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius resigns, leaving behind a legacy of incompetence and deception. “Rarely has any single public official done more to undermine the public’s confidence in the ability of government to function than Kathleen Sebelius.”
  • This just in: People still think ObamaCare sucks the farts out of dead wildebeests.
  • “Democrats face this reality: [ObamaCare]’s a political loser, and there’s no easy fix.”
  • New Jersey children lose health insurance thanks to ObamaCare.
  • The real reason for the Bundy Ranch standoff: Harry Reid’s son is in the pay of a Chinese solar power company that wants the land.
  • How Harry Reid’s insider trading and crony deals have made him a wealthy man.
  • Speaking of Harry Reid (via Iowahawk’s Twitter feed):

  • It turns out that the Overland Park Jewish Center shooter shared two fraternal organizations with late Sen. Robert Byrd.
  • Left out of all the left-wing Cesar Chavez hagiography: “Chavez had a very strong dislike for illegal immigrants.”
  • Indeed, we can best honor Cesar Chavez by making his birthday National Border Controls Day.
  • Backers of illegal alien amnesty may think it’s now or never.
  • It must have been a sad day for John Edwards, being barred from his sugar momma’s funeral.
  • Jay Carney is so use to lying, he can’t even resist PhotoShopping his own house. Badly. (Or maybe The Washingtonian is simply desperate to glamorize all Democrats profiled they won’t let little things like “competence” stand in the way…)
  • Is it just me, or did Hillary Clinton choose a singularly unflattering outfit for ducking shoes in?
  • The ideological slap-fight between radical lesbian feminists and tranny activists. “But all crazies are not created equal and, as crazy as the radical man-hating lesbians may be, they at least have valid science on their side in saying that ‘female’ is a biological category — genetically determined, rather than being a ‘social construct.'”
  • Vermonters just aren’t sure they want eyeball-bleeding tax rates just to satisfy the left-wing fantasy of single-payer health care.
  • France’s ruling socialists get their collective (ha!) asses kicked in municipal elections.
  • Property prices collapse in China. (Hat tip: Ann Althouse.)
  • Puerto Rico: 1.2 million workers, $70 billion in debt.
  • DC Power couple divorcing. Hilarity to ensue for, oh, probably a year or so.
  • Cowardly Brandeis University withdraws planned honorary degree for Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
  • Who is killing the bankers of Europe?
  • Ex-Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wants to “fix” the Second Amendment so its easier to disarm citizens.
  • Alec Baldwin forgets yet again that Twitter is not his friend.
  • Round Rock incumbent City Councilman Carlos Salinas appears to be benefiting from his position in a way that violates both city and state codes. How nice to pass a city-funded, interest-free loan for a building to a crony, then lease the same building back at below-market rates…
  • Well, this is disturbing: Kobe Bryant dispensing actual wisdom: “If we’ve progressed as a society, then you don’t jump to somebody’s defense just because they’re African-American. You sit and you listen to the facts just like you would in any other situation, right?” (From a New Yorker piece behind a paywall.) And naturally a firestorm erupted…
  • Speaking of the NBA: How two brothers owning a failing ABA franchise managed to earn a cool$1 billion from the NBA. The advantages of foresight,,,
  • PAX coming to San Antonio in 2014.

    • And remember that your taxes are due tomorrow…

    Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Border Control, Democrats, Elections, Guns, Media Watch, Supreme Court, video | 1 Comment »

    Guns/Crime Roundup for January 30, 2014

    Thursday, January 30th, 2014

    Time for another roundup of gun news, with a nice savory side-dish of criminal stupidity:

  • Dick Metcalf is like a guy who converted to Islam, then wonders why he can’t be a Catholic bishop anymore.
  • Could Abramski vs. United States strike down the ATF’s “straw purchase” regulations? Even so, unlike the poster, I don’t think this will mean “the gun-grabber’s drive for universal background checks is over as a constitutional matter,” since the gun grabbers will never give up on trying to disarm the law-abiding…
  • 12-year Oklahoma girl shoots home invader. She and her family are the sort of people Piers Morgan wants to disarm.
  • Sprouts decides that they don’t want law-abiding gun owners to shop there.
  • Florida lawmakers attempt to get the state to ban cooperation with Obama’s gun-grabbing agenda. Since it cites the Tenth Amendment, it’s not quite South Carolina’s 1832 Ordinance of Nullification… (Hat tip: Alphecca.)
  • Illinois wants to disarm those on medical marijuana.
  • Here’s a ProTip for another criminal supergenius: If you’re a registered sex offender, don’t film yourself firing guns.
  • Nicholas Johnson’s Negroes and the Gun: The Black Tradition of Arms is now out.
  • Naked and masturbating in the middle of an intersection is no way to go through life, son. (Hate tip: Ace.)

    • Tags:, , , , , , , ,
    Posted in Crime, Guns, Supreme Court | No Comments »

    District Judge Strikes Down ObamaCare’s Contraceptive Mandate

    Tuesday, December 17th, 2013

    U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan struck down the ObamaCare contraceptive mandate. If you read the actual decision, it’s a smackdown of both the mandate itself and the Obama Administration’s position on same;

    As for the self-certification requirement, the Court rejects the Government’s position that plaintiffs may be compelled to perform affirmative acts precluded by their religion if a court deems those acts merely “de minimis.” This argument – which essentially reduces to the claim that completing the self-certification places no burden on plaintiffs’ religion because “it’s just a form” – finds no support in the case law. As discussed, where a law places substantial pressure on a plaintiff to perform affirmative acts contrary to his religion, the Supreme Court has found a substantial burden without analyzing whether those acts are de minimis.”

    Cogan ruled against some of the plantiff’s arguments on other technical issues, but on the central issues of the case he ruled “the Mandate burdens plaintiffs’ religion by coercing them into authorizing third parties to provide this coverage through the self-certification requirement, an act forbidden by plaintiffs’ religion.”

    On his Facebook page, Ted Cruz hailed the ruling as a “Major victory for religious liberty.”

    Gabriel Malor of Ace of Spades has analyzed the ruling in more detail.

    Cogan’s ruling deals specifically with religious non-profits covered by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and as such does not directly affect the Hobby Lobby case the Supreme Court will be taking up (“none of these cases bear directly on the issue at hand”). However, his overall reasoning, if applied to that case, could very well lead to ruling that the contraceptive mandate is an unconstitutional burden on freedom of religious conscious as well.

    Remember, the fervor with which Nancy Pelosi refused to remove the contraceptive mandate and taxpayer-funded abortion from ObamaCare, even when it cost most of Bart Stupak ostensibly “pro-life” Democrats their seats, indicated that liberals regarded those sections as one of act’s most important features. If Cogan’s ruling is upheld, this is not only a major victory for religious liberty, but also a huge blow to ongoing Democratic attempts to marginalize religion in American life.

    Also remember that ObamaCare has no severability clause. If Judge Cogan’s ruling is upheld, there’s still a chance (though by no means a guarantee) that the rest of the act can be found unconstitutional as well.

    Tags:, , , , , ,
    Posted in ObamaCare, Supreme Court | No Comments »

    Blogroll Addition: Legal Insurrection

    Thursday, August 29th, 2013

    I’ll be wearing my science fiction hat a lot this week, so expect light posting through Labor Day (and maybe a little beyond).

    So instead of Actual Content, I’m going to highlight some new additions to the Blogroll.

    First up: Legal Insurrection (or Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion, to use the full, “Hell no I’m not going to type that every time” name), which I’ve linked the occasional tidbit from forever, but only just added to the blogroll. Run by Cornell Law Professor William A. Jacobson, Legal Insurrection covers a wide variety of political topics, legal and otherwise. And he was kind enough to add a link to my post on the #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen tag to his own post.

    He posts frequently on interesting topics, so go over and take a look when you get a chance.

    Tags:, ,
    Posted in Supreme Court, Uncategorized | No Comments »

    « Older Entries
    Newer Entries »