Tag Archives: Supreme Court

SCOTUS decision paves way for expanded cannabis legalization

marijuana-lawsOn March 18, the Oregon Department of Revenue announced that during the first month of legal cannabis sales, nearly $3.5 million in tax revenues were raised, which far exceeded projections. Reuters reported, “tax receipts from January also surpassed the first-month tallies from recreational cannabis sales in Colorado and Washington state, the first two states to legalize general commercial distribution of pot for adults.” see more…

( -)-(- )Comments Off on SCOTUS decision paves way for expanded cannabis legalization

On the Supreme Court vacancy

SCOTUS pix 2011Over the past couple of decades, every new appointment to the US Supreme Court has been more contentious and politically motivated than the last. Since the first appointment to the Supreme Court, 68 justices were approved on voice votes, Abe Fortas being the most recent in 1965 during the term of President Lyndon Johnson. It was three years after Fortas was appointed to the Supreme Court that Chief Justice Earl Warren attempted to work out a back room deal with Johnson to appoint Fortas as his successor prior to the 1968 Presidential election. The plan ultimately failed, and Warren officially retired on June 23, 1969. Prior to that attempt, the last Presidential election year vacancy to be filled was in 1940 when the Senate approved Frank Murphy on a voice vote. see more…

( -)-(- )Comments Off on On the Supreme Court vacancy

On Hobby Lobby and Target

There were recently two major announcements regarding private businesses.

The first from the US Supreme Court which ruled “the regulations promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services requiring employers to provide their female employees with no-cost access to contraception violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).”
see more…

( -)-(- )Comments Off on On Hobby Lobby and Target

Hobby Lobby legalese newspeak jibbery joo

“Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding…” —Thomas Jefferson (edit)

What Thomas Jefferson is telling us in this one line is that all laws must be written so the layman can understand them.

As with the Supreme Court decision on Hobby Lobby a whole diatribe about birth control mandate not being enforceable over businesses with religious views and blah, blah, blah.

At the end of the day, so-called judges used their foreign language of legalese to rule: covering employees benefits that may violate the employers religious views are okay, but the illegal law that authorized this all in the first place is still okay. see more…

( -)-(- )4 comments

The good, the bad and the ugly: Supreme Court style

During the last week of June, the Supreme Court issued two major rulings, one regarding Arizona’s tough immigration law and the other the much awaited verdict of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly called “Obamacare.”

The court rightly ruled 3 provisions of Arizona’s SB 1070 to be unconstitutional. SCOTUSblog reports, the court invalidated “sections [of the law] making it a crime to be in Arizona without legal papers, making it a crime to apply for or get a job in the state, or allowing police to arrest individuals who had committed crimes that could lead to their deportation.” Essentially the court ruled that employers can’t be forced to act as law enforcement and that individuals are not required to carry identification at all times.

The court allowed the worst provision of the law to remain intact, that being the provision allowing police “to make a ‘reasonable attempt . . . to determine the immigration status’ of any person they stop, detain, or arrest on some other legitimate basis… The law also provides that ‘[a]ny person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released’.” [PDF] In layman’s terms: if you see a cop in Arizona and say “hi” or ask him a question, he then has the authority to determine whether or not you are legally present in that jurisdiction.

Sadly, upholding the “papers, please” provision of SB 1070 is not the worst ruling by the Supreme Court. On June 28, the court upheld the most offensive provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. see more…

( -)-(- )Comments Off on The good, the bad and the ugly: Supreme Court style

Gov. Gary Johnson opposes Supreme Court ruling on health care

{reprinted from the Gary Johnson campaign blog}

GOV. GARY JOHNSON CALLS SCOTUS HEALTH CARE RULING AN “INCREDIBLE BLOW TO BEDROCK PRINCIPLES”

June 28 2012, Santa Fe, NM – Libertarian presidential nominee and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson released the following statement in response to the Supreme Court’s health care ruling:

“It has been clear for a while that we need a new President and a new Congress. Now it appears we need a new Supreme Court.

“Whether the Court chooses to call the individual mandate a tax or anything else, allowing it to stand is a truly disturbing decision. The idea that government can require an individual to buy something simply because that individual exists and breathes in America is an incredible blow to the bedrock principles of freedom and liberty. It must be repealed, and Congress needs to get about doing so today.

“There is one thing we know about health care. Government cannot create a system that will reduce costs while increasing access. Only competition and the price transparency that competition will bring can accomplish the imperatives of affordability and availability. Whether it is the President’s plan or the Republican prescription drug benefit, the idea that anyone in Washington can somehow manage one of the most essential and substantial parts of both our quality of life and the economy is, and always has been, fundamentally wrong.

“We can never know how many Americans are out of work today because of the uncertainty the monstrous health care law has caused. The Court has done nothing to remove that burden.

“Nothing about today’s decision changes the basic reality that it is impossible to eliminate deficit spending and remove the smothering consequences of federal debt without dramatically reducing the costs of Medicare and Medicaid. And neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have given the slightest hint of willingness to do so.”

( -)-(- )1 comment

Obasm over for Obamacare

The Associated Press follows a headline with a good punchline:

And how perfect is it that the Urban Dictionary already defined this way back in 2007, “The pleasure that a liberal-leaning journalist gets when writing a fawning story about U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL). An “obasm” is a story so gushy and so fluffy, bereft of objectivity, that one imagines having to clean up after the writer with a mop and bucket.”

Consider the Supreme Court the current mop and bucket sent in to clean up the legislative mess.

I’m not fretting over the buckets of joy some are gushing over what is actually the Supreme Court’s almost guaranteed decision to push the reset button Obamacare. The requirement to buy insurance is just one facet of contention being reviewed now by the third branch of the checks and balances on that convoluted rush-job of legislature. see more…

( -)-(- )Comments Off on Obasm over for Obamacare