The Supreme Court ordered a halt Monday to early voting in Ohio that was scheduled to begin this week, clearing the way for the state to close polls on the Sunday before election day, when African American turnout has been heaviest.
The emergency order, approved 5 to 4, is a victory for Ohio Republicans and a setback for civil rights lawyers who had challenged a law that shortened the early-voting period by about a week.
Several other election-year disputes could reach the high court before November. Wisconsin, Texas and North Carolina also face pending court challenges to Republican-sponsored voting restrictions that take effect this year.
Ohio had adopted one of the nation’s most generous early-voting policies after what was widely considered to be an election day debacle in 2004, when voters waited hours in long lines to cast ballots and many cities did not have enough voting machines to accommodate the turnout.
This man shut down American commerce because he wanted to insulate himself from the effects of a depression by cutting his workers wages in the middle of said depression. Plus he liked being a feudal lord.
Note how the Federal Government and the Supreme Court were entirely on his side. When Federal troops were called in to break the strike it was at the behest of railway owners, not the City of Chicago or the State of Illinois.
Yet some people still believe this is the way things should be.
Punishments to include jail time and hard labor.
I’m also guessing by the wording of the Amendment, that Michael Wilson has no respect for the establishment clause either. Man you can just smell the homophobia.
Oh and gay people have made it a zero sum game? No bigots like you have made it a zero sum game. You guys made it a zero sum game from day one. I’ll bet Wilson is a big supporter of that hideous “Kill The Gays” bill. American Religious right loons worked tirelessly to spread homophobia in Uganda which help to bring that about in the first place. I bet Wilson is proud of those people.
This makes me so glad its not easy to amend our constitution.
He doesn’t have much respect for “man’s law” either. He’d rather we have attacked the supreme court justices who ruled in favor of gay rights and abortion and just refuse to obey the law. Unsurprisingly he’s also a supporter of Cliven Bundy because he wants “the second commandment to be defended by the second amendment.” Wilson doesn’t even think “Fox News” is “conservative,” and I’m not joking when I say that.
I want to thank Jeremy Hooper for creating a post about this at his blog Good As You. He’s one of the people who’s “life style” Wilson wants to outlaw. If not for him I wouldn’t know about this this wingnut.
The Supreme Court is used to having its decisions publicly criticized, but rarely in R-rated language spouted by a federal judge, who says the justices should just “stfu.”
The remarks come from Nebraska-based Judge Richard Kopf, who has a reputation for provocative commentary on his personal blog.
Kopf, an appointee of President George H.W. Bush, criticized the high court’s ruling last week in the so-called “Hobby Lobby” case.
The decision gave some for-profit businesses the right to deny birth control coverage to their employees if they opposed on religious grounds. The 5-4 decision against a provision of Obamacare was predictably divided in public opinion.
“Five male Justices of the Supreme Court, who are all members of the Catholic faith and who each were appointed by a President who hailed from the Republican party, decided that a huge corporation, with thousands of employees and gargantuan revenues, was a ‘person’ entitled to assert a religious objection to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate because that corporation was ‘closely held’ by family members,” he wrote. “To the average person, the result looks stupid and smells worse.”
And he went further. “Next term is the time for the Supreme Court to go quiescent— this term and several past terms has proven that the court is now causing more harm (division) to our democracy than good by deciding hot button cases that the court has the power to avoid. As the kids say, it is time for the Court to stfu.”
Lawyers for two Guantanamo Bay detainees have filed motions asking a U.S. court to block officials from preventing the inmates from taking part in communal prayers during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. The lawyers argue that - in light of the Supreme Court’s recent Hobby Lobby decision - the detainees’ rights are protected under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
I’m actually in agreement with the detainees here, since this is the kind of thing the RFRA was supposed to protect. Expect the wingnuts to blow a gasket though, since when they say “religious freedom”, they mean “for rich, Christian (usually white) men only”. They keep forgetting that other religions exist.
I hope he’s right about this. I felt like posting his entire argument here, but that would be against the rules. Anyway, I’d like to know what you think of his idea. I’m no legal scholar, but I think it might work.
This thought suddenly occurred to me Monday night as I was prepping for a Google Hangout to discuss the Hobby Lobby ruling: The majority opinion gave a roadmap for how the Obama administration can essentially moot the ruling unilaterally. In fact, they can do it today if they want. Let me explain.
For nearly two years, Americans United has detailed the truth behind Hobby Lobby v. Sebelius, a case brought by a chain of craft stores that claims it has a religious freedom right to deny important preventative health care to its employees.
We’ve spread the word about the consequences should the U.S. Supreme Court grant the owner of a for-profit corporation the right to make highly personal decisions for his or her employees based purely on religious dogma. The creation of a fictional “corporate conscience” that allows a company to “exercise religion” under the First Amendment is dangerously absurd.
And yet, it seems some people still don’t get what’s really going on here.
In an opinion piece published yesterday by Religion News Service, Cathy Lynn Grossman wrote that Hobby Lobby is not interested in imposing its fundamentalist Christian faith on anyone. She criticized Americans United for implying that Green has theocratic leanings.
On Thursday the Supreme Court unanimously struck down a 35-foot protest-free “buffer” zone outside abortion clinics in Massachusetts. The justices ruled that the zone violates the First Amendment rights of protesters.
The Supreme Court “buffer zone”.
No not the straw man we call out here every once in a while. In brief-The gun purchase law that applies to Federally licensed gun dealers and anyone in a private transaction that knows of a criminal intent. Which also points out why we need national universal FFL registration of most guns. And how the current SCOTUS is upholding regulation even as they have struck down a couple near bans.
The Court majority, in an opinion written by Elena Kagan, found that Abramski’s entire argument rested on only one true fact, namely that he was able to pass a background check at the point of sale. But to find in favor of Abramski’s larger argument, according to Kagan and the majority, “would undermine — indeed, for all important purposes, would virtually repeal — the gun law’s core provisions.” In other words, this case really was about whether or not the government could regulate firearm transactions at all, not just about the behavior of a particular individual at the time he purchased a gun.