"So what are they afraid of? I wrote earlier this week about the utter failure on the part of Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats to connect this hearing to what is going to be a catastrophic series of progressive losses at the Supreme Court this term, and the almost staggering inability to lay out any kind of theory for progressive jurisprudence, or even a coherent theory for the role of an unelected judiciary in a constitutional democracy. My colleague Mark Joseph Stern wrote today about a broadside attack on the whole idea of unenumerated rights, substantive due process, and the entire line of cases that protect Americans from forced sterilization, indoctrination of their children, and penalties for using birth control, and afford them the right to marry whom they want. More mysterious than this coordinated GOP project... was the almost complete silence from Senate Democrats on these issues of substantive due process, privacy, and bodily autonomy. On the simplest level, the hearing might have been an opportunity to explain why Roe v. Wade is in fact the tip of the constitutional iceberg [sic].... I understand that the decision was taken to just get the nominee confirmed. Take the win. But for those of us watching and waiting to see Democrats support and back the nominee, there was an immense sense of underreaction."
Writes Dahlia Lithwick in "Cory Booker Aside, Democrats Stranded Ketanji Brown Jackson" (Slate).
Here's the Cory Booker performance:
Sen. @CoryBooker to Judge Jackson: "I'm not letting anybody in the Senate steal my joy...Don't worry, my sister. Don't worry. God has got you. How do I know that? Because you're here and I know what it's taken for you to sit in that seat." pic.twitter.com/m7cGjLrftZ
— CSPAN (@cspan) March 23, 2022
Do I need to explain my "[sic]" on "the hearing might have been an opportunity to explain why Roe v. Wade is in fact the tip of the constitutional iceberg [sic]"? Lithwick cannot have wanted to characterize Roe and related cases as the iceberg. Aren't we rooting for the ship?
ADDED: I think I can solve the mystery of what the Democrats are afraid of. They're afraid of the electorate and that to lay out a "theory for progressive
jurisprudence" would only alienate people. It's better to hold back, blandly honor the historic!!! nominee, and wait for the Republicans to create the opportunities to call them meanies. I strongly suspect that Lithwick knows this very well.
Posts
104 comments:
You know where forced sterilization is taking place? & on predominantly black women?
....
wait for it....
CALIFORNIA'S PRISON system.
Who runs California? hmmmmm. I'm thinking. I'm thinking....
In KBJ's defense, most menfolk can't define whether or not the emphatically and vehemently heterosexual Cory Booker is a man or not either.
Most men aren't bi-ologists.
Mark Joseph Stern inadvertently highlights what the Democrats' problem is.
a broadside attack on the whole idea of unenumerated rights, substantive due process, and the entire line of cases that protect Americans from forced sterilization, indoctrination of their children, and penalties for using birth control, and afford them the right to marry whom they want.
Most of this list is BS. ("Forced sterilization"!?) Democrats can't capitalize on it because it's a left-wing fantasy. ("Oh, those evil Rethuglicans!") and left-wing fantasies don't translate well into the real world. The few things on the list that are real (ex., "indoctrination of their children"), the Democrats desperately don't want the American people to know how they intend to "protect" us from it. So they have to sit on their hands.
Dahlia Lithwick's the thickest person in public life with the possible exception of Laurence Tribe.
whose "we?" I'm not rooting for the ship of murdering pre-born humans
Fiercely heterosexual Booker is such a clown.
How Spartacus ever got admitted to Stanford will forever be a mystery (except for the affirmative action part)...
Dahlia says:
"Forced sterilization, indoctrination of their children, and penalties for using birth control, and afford them the right to marry whom they want."
What is it with leftists and their made-up universe?
-"Forced Sterilization" Is there A GOP person anywhere who is calling for this?
-"Indoctrination of children" - We already have this in the form of our public school system. And the indoctrination is leftist. And many parents would like to escape it, and they are thwarted. So what the fuck is she talking about?
-"penalties for using birth control" Again - what is she talking about?
-"the right to marry who they want" - Gay rights are so solid, we are now moving forward to a shining future where we can gleefully and proudly worship the Gay flag with a pledge. Now that's progress! So Again - what the F is talking about?
All BS scare mongering for her leftwing Hivemind. Quick - refer to the Handmaidens tale guide book on how the GOP will ruin your life! eeeek!
"a broadside attack on...substantive due process"
Which reminds me of this 1980 classic:
"Familiarity breeds inattention, and we apparently need periodic reminding that 'substantive due process' is a contradiction in terms – sort of like 'green pastel redness.'"
- John Hart Ely
It occurs to me that using "strawman" might be sexist, but "strawperson" just doesn't have that lovely ring to it.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/03/24/school-board-of-trustees-plays-critical-role-in-pushing-critical-race-theory-despite-ketanji-brown-jacksons-denial/
I hope this isn’t off topic… it does belong down the posts a ways.
The ship- if believed to be of fools or conservatives- is gonna get it, in the end. Yay iceberg.
Isn’t that the liberal logic?
Aren't we rooting for the ship?
Too many have been told the ship is on the wrong side of history.
Holy Bugged-Eyed Bazookas, Robin! That Cory Booker sure has 'em wowing an AA jewel.
https://thehill.com/sites/default/files/bookercory_090618gn2_lead.jpg
Corey's right. Janice Rogers Brown SHOULD HAVE sat there in 2005, but Biden filibustered her....twice!! Just because KJB is a Progressive, it doesn't give her the RIGHT to be there. She should answer the questions....and the Progressives in the media should SHUT up about her being treated as bad as Kavenaugh...because there IS NO COMPARISON.
Once you’ve reduced yourself to writing in cliches you have to walk the walk where the rubber meets the road or the 800 pound gorilla will throw you under the bus.
Have we reached the point in the hearings in which her high school yearbooks are thoroughly examined? That’s really all I care about, my sister…
How was Sen. Booker, NJ admitted into Stanford? Football scholarship. He was named to the USA Today 1986 All-America team (so was Emmitt Smith). Did okay academically, becoming a Rhodes Scholar (as was Sen. Kennedy, LA).
“ Lithwick cannot have wanted to characterize Roe and related cases as the iceberg. Aren't we rooting for the ship?”
There is no ship in the “tip of the iceberg” metaphor, only more iceberg.
Hope this wake-up doesn't hinder my "forced sterilization" plan by too much. Thank God for the Covid vaccines!
Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...
What is it with leftists and their made-up universe?
They enjoy imagining themselves as the Star Wars Rebel Alliance fighting the Evil Empire.
Unfortunately, that's difficult now that they've taken over the cultural institutions and some of the country's wealthiest people are on their side. That's why the are (IMO) trying to figure out how to set up permanent Democrat rule. That, however, will not satisfy them either since it's hard to be the Rebel Alliance when you're actually the Empire.
One thing the collective left will not mention is that thanks to modern technology, a human baby is viable outside of a WOMAN'S womb ...
...at about 6 months.
even baby girls.
Democrats make me want to puke.
Janice Rogers Brown again? Any sympathy for Elana Kagan, also nominated to DC Circuit, but blocked by Republicans? She later showed that does not prevent nomination to USSC. Or for Sotomayor? Whose nomination to Second Circuit was blocked by Republicans until Sen D'Amato, who supported her and was up for election, got her unblocked. Breyer is an unusual case. Because of the friends across the aisle he made as an aide on the Judiciary Committee, Republicans cooperated to get him confirmed during the lame duck session after 1980 election.
To 1st Circuit.
Do they actually have the votes to confirm her? Aren't the Democrats still down a Senator?
Breyer made a point that he wasn't going to leave a vacancy by quitting before his successor was confirmed. My understanding is that the Turtle could bottle this nomination up in the Judiciary Committee based on the power sharing agreement produced by having a 50-50 Senate. Maybe some hardball coming up ala Merrick Garland? Get Biden to pull KBJ and nominate Childs?
North of the...
"it's hard to be the Rebel Alliance when you're actually the Empire."
LOL - that is so true!
It’s the bottom of the iceberg that’s the hidden b**ch that bashes the boat.
Also, this.
Another tip on another ‘berg, in her own words:
https://www.scribd.com/document/566346425/Ketanji-Brown-Jackson-Prevention-Versus-Punishment-Toward-a-Principled-Distinction-in-the-Restraint-of-Released-Sex-Offenders-cropped#from_embed
I'm not certain if there is a "broadside attack on the whole idea of unenumerated rights." Maybe its more like a question. "If rights are not enumerated, or God-given (natural), where do they come from?" Harry Blackmun and Co.? Early on, for those of us who have memories, legal scholars were unconvinced by Blackmun's answers attempted in Roe v. Wade.
This is particularly relevant where unenumerated rights or "substantive due process" becomes the means by which unelected judges override the will of elected legislatures.
“indoctrination of their children”
You mean with CRT and transgenderism in first grade?
'How was Sen. Booker, NJ admitted into Stanford? Football scholarship. He was named to the USA Today 1986 All-America team (so was Emmitt Smith). Did okay academically, becoming a Rhodes Scholar (as was Sen. Kennedy, LA).'
If he's so smart, why is he such a moron?
"They're afraid of the electorate and that to lay out a "theory for progressive jurisprudence" would only alienate people"
It's the one hopeful sign in the current phase of the culture war: for the moment, progs still have to lie and dissemble, with the occasional assist of an Althousian rewrite.
...I remain utterly mystified by the Democrats..
It's Easily Explained; by the fact that ALL current Democrats smoked SO MUCH weed back in college;
That they are in a Permanent Drug Induced Stupor... Prove Me Wrong
Republicans might (or might not) be Nazis; but Democrats are DUMB ASSES
Think what they Could have done, in the years since 2008.. Think what they HAVE done?
O'Bama Care? Is that all there is?
"Sister"? What is he implying?
Or, maybe Cory Booker is a biologist.
Below is this Creighton alum’s exchange with the Rhodes Scholar and Stanford alum.
“DDB: Senator, during your speech you talked about fairness. When are you going to apologize to Justice Kavanaugh for your performance at the confirmation hearings? (Crowd: Boos, laughs, “no,” “never.”)
CB: First of all, sir, you called it a performance. I stood every single day and was outraged how those hearings were run.
DDB: Hold it. You mean Senator Grassley conducted an unfair hearing in your opinion? (Crowd: Yes. Yeah. Yeah.)
CB: I was threatened to be kicked out of the Senate for challenging and releasing. It’s like someone is applying for a job and you only get to see ten percent of their resume. They kept secret.
DDB: Well, you read his opinions, didn’t you?
CB: Sir, I’m not going to get into an argument. I believe in the old saying you don’t have to attend every argument you are invited to. (Crowd applauds.) I’m proud of my performance, or as you call it, but I’m proud of what I did to fight as I did to make sure that someone who is not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court did not. (Wild crowd cheers, applause and whoops cut off the last of his answer.)”
No, to of the iceberg is correct. The ship, counselor, is the constitutional republic.
I'm sure the MSM will be castigating Booker for his God reference.
Vaxx mandator sez wut?
You know where forced sterilization is taking place? & on predominantly black women?
....
wait for it....
CALIFORNIA'S PRISON system.
You are just a fucking liar. Yes, California did perform forced sterilization until 1979. And yes, there was some sloppy paperwork in subsequent years that meant it was unclear sterilizations that occurred had fully informed consent. But such practices were common the U.S. throughout the 20th century. You know who was forcibly sterilizing women recently? Donald Trump's ICE
Blogger Left Bank of the Charles said...
“ Lithwick cannot have wanted to characterize Roe and related cases as the iceberg. Aren't we rooting for the ship?”
There is no ship in the “tip of the iceberg” metaphor, only more iceberg.
The "tip of the iceberg" refers to the entire leftist agenda that is still hidden.
There are a few hints of it around, but the lefties don't want it talked about yet. Especially before midterms.
"You will own nothing and be happy."
Christopher B said...
Do they actually have the votes to confirm her? Aren't the Democrats still down a Senator?
Apparently, he's back at work https://navajotimes.com/reznews/region-briefs-lujan-returns-to-senate-after-suffering-stroke/
does this tie into gilbar's assertion, that democrats are SO STUPID; that they can have a stroke and not lose any IQ points? Why, Yes; yes it does
"forced sterilization"
by This, i'm assuming they mean "puberty blocker" (chemical castration) drugs?
Because We ALL Know what happens to a girl that takes "puberty blockers".. She becomes sterile
Donald’s Trump’s ICE: accused …
Found guilty, we’re they?
Convicted?
>>They're afraid of the electorate
You could just stop there. Explains pretty much everything the Democratic party does.
I'm pleased to read that Senator Lujan is back on the good side of healthy. Hadn't seen that before.
I hope "Everyone Poops" is still to be taught in kindergarten. That's the sex that the kids are interested in, and shows our commonality.
Polymorphous perverse is the technical term.
Hey, Reading? I Read your link, thanx!
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) was accused
One nurse at a facility in Ocilla, Georgia filed a whistleblower complaint alleging concern
Representative Pramila Jayapal, said that seventeen or eighteen people held at the Irwin County Detention Center had undergone these invasive procedures without giving proper consent.
ICE maintained that people should be weary of these claims until all the facts are accounted for
scholars are also concerned as to whether or not these detainees will be given COVID-19 vaccines.
I'm not sure ANYTHING could be MORE PERSUASIVE than your link..
At least not anything so devoid of facts
Blogger Readering said..."Janice Rogers Brown again? Any sympathy for Elana Kagan, also nominated to DC Circuit, but blocked by Republicans? She later showed that does not prevent nomination to USSC. Or for Sotomayor? Whose nomination to Second Circuit was blocked by Republicans until Sen D'Amato, who supported her and was up for election, got her unblocked."
You ruined your argument by including Sotomayor. She doesn't belong there.
And for that matter, Kagan is on the court. Rogers Brown is not.
My God, Booker is an embarrassment. Good thing he's in the Senate where he blends in just fine. Except when he's talking and there's a camera recording it.
I'm still wondering why it was so hard for Ketanji Brown-Jackson to answer the question about what a woman is. Word games aside, it's quite simple. Or at least it was for about 200,000 years. Even when we were in our 'grunting' stage, we knew men and women.
That's why we're here now.
It's got to be mind-bogglingly hard to be a progressive. Imagine going to college and paying them to destroy your mind. That's got to be hard on a person. Especially a black woman. Ha! Just kidding. It's hard on everyone. Except white men. Ha! Just kidding again.
You see where this goes?
The "Roe v Wade as tip of the iceberg [sic]" metaphor is odd, as you note. I think Lithwick's point is that a huge list of rights depend on Roe (even if Roe was decided in 1973, its legal reasoning retroactively shores up rights articulated in previous cases). Democrats might seriously believe this. Might? Nay, certainly.
But that strikes me as a potentially risky stance to take. What if Roe's conclusion is correct (no restricting legal elective abortion) but its reasoning was deeply flawed? I audited a course on constitutional law and recall a lecture in which the professor (known for being one of the only conservatives on the faculty) characterized Blackmun's reasoning as embarrassing and tried to explain why.
A problem I sometimes observe in more evangelical Christianity is when people say "everything depends on This Claim being true", and, based on my what I learned in graduate school (doctorate in Ancient Near East) and seminary, they're setting themselves up for failure.
Funny that both Althouse and Begley referred to Booker’s “performance.”
I hope "Everyone Poops" is still to be taught in kindergarten. That's the sex that the kids are interested in, and shows our commonality.
That you consider pooping a sexual act, reveals something very disturbing about you.
If a majority of Americans knew Judge Brown's radical beliefs, and how she will vote on Crime issues, immigration, voting issues, and Trans gender rights, etc. they would demand she be rejected.
Fortunately for the D's, the average American doesn't grasp how the SCOTUS works or what it does, let alone get the connection between Judge Brown being on the SCOTUS and the affect on their lives. From just being online I can tell you that large numbers of Conservatives get state and federal courts mixed up. And they don't understand the difference between a District, Appeals, and Supreme court judge.
All they do is get OUTRAGED when some ruling doesn't go their way, and fume about "Hawaian Judges" or some such nonsense. OR they write 20 pages memos on why the judges were wrong, completely oblivious to the fact that their opinion doesn't matter.
Blogger Freder Frederson said...
I hope "Everyone Poops" is still to be taught in kindergarten. That's the sex that the kids are interested in, and shows our commonality.
That you consider pooping a sexual act, reveals something very disturbing about you.
Hilarious. Sex expert Freder is disturbed by a reference to a normal act using the same orifice used by others who are progressive.
Blogger Readering said...
Janice Rogers Brown again? Any sympathy for Elana Kagan, also nominated to DC Circuit, but blocked by Republicans? She later showed that does not prevent nomination to USSC. Or for Sotomayor?
The difference is, among other things, JR Brown would have been the first black female and Miguel Estrada would have been the first Latino. Both were light years more qualified than Sotomayor. Kagan is a lefty but has a good resume. The present nominee has no resume that we can see, such as the sentencing commission.
No Fredder - I am not lying.
You are NOT informed. And that's because you are a pathetic loyalist leftist.
Feel free to check the dates:
Survivors of California’s forced sterilizations: ‘It’s like my life wasn’t worth anything’
Democracy NOW! - that bastion of right wing news:
New Film Links Forced Sterilization in California Prisons to Horrific History of Eugenics in U.S.
Web ExclusiveSeptember 22, 2020
I audited a course on constitutional law and recall a lecture in which the professor (known for being one of the only conservatives on the faculty) characterized Blackmun's reasoning as embarrassing and tried to explain why.
That's because:
A) There was no reasoning involved
and,
B) the decision is embarrassing. Even Althouse has trouble defending it. That's why they've moved on to the slightly less embarrassing Fourteenth Amendment argument.
It’s not fear it’s contempt…
Fredder - that link you tossed out isn't very reputable.
Also it doesn't say "Donald Trump's ICE".. now does it? So deceptive of you.
But glad you brought up Biden's open and un-secure Southern Border. Where illegal entrants are pouring and in causing a huge health and national security crisis.
More on recent history of black women being tricked into sterilizations against their will in DEMOCRAT RUN California... circa not too long ago.
Belly of the Beast
Premiered November 23, 2020
Directed by Erika Cohn
Two women investigate a pattern of illegal sterilizations in women’s prisons and battle the Department of Corrections.
What's this stuff about "unenumerated rights---protecting parents from the indoctrination of their children"? Sorry Ms. Lithwick but that ship has already sailed with CRT, and all of the LGBTQ stuff that kids in elementary school are fed. There's a term for what Ms. Lithwick suffers from "CRI" --as in cranial rectal insertion. Still she blithely continues to write codswallop like this.
That said, if I were a Democrat strategist, I'd ram this nomination through as quickly as possible, and keep those committee hearings short. After all true Democracy dies in darkness--so let's keep this process short.
Had a matter against Estrada and hus firm. Certainly qualified, and darling of elitist FedSoc types. Know about JRB from practicing in CA. She was not an elitist FedSoc darling.
As always the Democrats are trying to keep their agenda hidden.
Whenever they expose what their goals are they lose.
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...
Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...
What is it with leftists and their made-up universe?
They enjoy imagining themselves as the Star Wars Rebel Alliance fighting the Evil Empire.
Unfortunately, that's difficult now that they've taken over the cultural institutions and some of the country's wealthiest people are on their side. That's why the are (IMO) trying to figure out how to set up permanent Democrat rule. That, however, will not satisfy them either since it's hard to be the Rebel Alliance when you're actually the Empire.
========
in their theory of physics if you hang the mirror you look into upside down you can invert the image
She's an affirmative action, hyper partisan, left wing ideologue that deserves to be no where near the SCOTUS. What a farce. Everything is fake, including the last election, and this is the result.
I think I get it now . . . When the ship is conducting a broadside attack, you root for the iceberg!
I understand the meaning of tip of the iceberg, but the reason to be concerned about it is the *danger* presented to ships. If you like Roe and the rest of the caselaw in that set, you don’t want to characterize it as that notorious peril. I think Roe et Al should be the ship and the iceberg should be the conservatives’ plans.
Didn’t mean to capitalize “al”…
The problem with both Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern is that they don't have the integrity to present the issues fairly. They preach to their choir, and do so in an incredibly dishonest way. If either had actually practiced law, they would learn that one of the things you need to do is to fully understand your adversary's position and viewpoint. If you can't be honest there, you will surely lose.
It's unbelievable that Lithwick writes that the "conservatives" want to gut constitutional protections against the indoctrination of their children. She's from Virginia - she must know that the far left's suppression of parents was a turning point in the last election.
I am not certain as to why people are so certain that she will be confirmed. The Republicans have an equal number on the committee, and could vote in unison to table the nomination, or at least against putting it to the whole Senate. The Senate could override the committee, but that may be subject to filibuster. In theory, her nomination could be kept in limbo in perpetuity. Even if a vote is forced, there is no guarantee that Sinema, Tester, Manchin, Murkowski, Collins or Romney would vote to confirm her. All that can be said is that she has better odds than not.
If there is any justice, she will be Borked as she is clearly unqualified for the job.
Once courts become super-legislatures, confirmation hearings, and coverage of confirmation hearings, become super-dishonest. How could it be otherwise?
I am not certain as to why people are so certain that she will be confirmed. The Republicans have an equal number on the committee, and could vote in unison to table the nomination, or at least against putting it to the whole Senate. The Senate could override the committee, but that may be subject to filibuster. In theory, her nomination could be kept in limbo in perpetuity. Even if a vote is forced, there is no guarantee that Sinema, Tester, Manchin, Murkowski, Collins or Romney would vote to confirm her. All that can be said is that she has better odds than not.
I’ve been saying this from the beginning. I guess that’s two…
@Blair ... that's my thinking, too, and it certainly seems from how this hearing is going that the GOP would be in a defensible position. Graham would have been a sure vote to confirm (IIRC he's voted to confirm every USSC nominee proposed by a Democrat who came to a floor vote) but I wonder if he might break that over Childs' rejection, or at least be willing to make the Democrats sweat.
She's an affirmative action, hyper partisan, left wing ideologue that deserves to be no where near the SCOTUS. What a farce. Everything is fake, including the last election, and this is the result.
It’s like everyone is saying I just had a great idea: let’s put Maxine Waters on the court! and everyone is saying YES!!!!
Just the tip!
Boy, the best thing that could happen for Dem Senate chances in November would be GOP successfuly blocking confirmation vote on KBJ. The Minority Leader has signaled that he feels the same way.
So God is a statist? As a libertarian and atheist, I might have known.
I'm still wondering why it was so hard for Ketanji Brown-Jackson to answer the question about what a woman is. Word games aside, it's quite simple. Or at least it was for about 200,000 years. Even when we were in our 'grunting' stage, we knew men and women.
============
how to grunt/groak if it bleeds it can breed?
If either had actually practiced law, they would learn that one of the things you need to do is to fully understand your adversary's position and viewpoint. If you can't be honest there, you will surely lose.
===========
even after shopping for forum and finding right judge? which is one way to practice law!
On his way home from the hearing, Booker saved a woman from a burning car, 2 cats, 3 puppies and an 102 yr. old great grandma from a burning building.
I’ve been saying this from the beginning. I guess that’s two…
Sorry, a tie (which it was) goes to the full Senate. Your only hope now is Manchin, and hope that none the three most RINO Senators you hate don't vote for her.
Did Cory cry or just mist up? He's an embarrassment to sensitive males everywhere.
Republicans aren't going to prevent her from being confirmed, and voters don't care if Republicans vote against her. At this point, voters don't care much whether she's confirmed or not.
". . . Because you're here and I know what it's taken for you to sit in that seat."
Jackson's father was a government lawyer and her mother was an academic.
Cory Booker's parents were IBM executives.
Both Booker and Jackson attended law school when those schools were desperate to enroll and graduate women and minority students.
Aside from skin color, both of their biographies are closer to those of Supreme Court justices and US Senators than they are like my biography.
Your only hope now is Manchin, and hope that none the three most RINO Senators you hate don't vote for her.
Nah, she will be confirmed and Romney and the other RINOs will vote for her. Nobody cares if she is a lying,leftist radical because she will fill a leftist seat. I would be very concerned if there is something seriously wrong with Thomas.
Readering said...
"Boy, the best thing that could happen for Dem Senate chances in November would be GOP successfuly blocking confirmation vote on KBJ. The Minority Leader has signaled that he feels the same way."
You honest to god don't have a clue, do you? This makes not one whit of difference. You're pooch was screwed many months ago and you just keep doubling down.
Spartacus and T-Bone…
Biden says sanctions never deter, world left scratching its collective head…
https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1507053391440224261?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1507053391440224261%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ace.mu.nu%2F
'Didn’t mean to capitalize “al”…'
Fucking autocrat...
In order to get a vote in the senate, the nominee needs a majority in the judiciary committee, which is split 50-50. If no republican votes, her nomination dies.
If she's primarily concerned with privacy and bodily autonomy, she surely was outraged and dismayed by the vaccine and mask mandates that have been imposed on us citizens over the past two years.
Maybe you can pull up one or two of her columns addressing those issues.
What is "progressive jurisprudence"? Is this just making up the law to suit your political positions? I don't remember Dahlia Lithwick arguing for the unvaccinated using the line of bodily autonomy. Nor for defending the rights of children and their parents against forced indoctrination. Or does she mean something different?
Hilarious. Sex expert Freder is disturbed by a reference to a normal act using the same orifice used by others who are progressive.
So sex expert Dr Michael K KNOWS that only progressives engage in anal sex. I was not aware of this "fact".
Joe Smith said...
"How Spartacus ever got admitted to Stanford will forever be a mystery (except for the affirmative action part)..."
Says the guy who's education consists of 11/2 semesters at UW-Stevens Point.
Joe Smith said...
" 'Or for Sotomayor?'
You're sticking up for the wide Latina?
She's dumber than Kamala, and that's pretty dumb..."
Says the fellow who's only experience in a courtroom is that time he copped a plea to that Peeping Tom charge.
"was the almost complete silence from Senate Democrats on these issues of substantive due process, privacy, and bodily autonomy."
Where is the evidence that the current Democratic party is in favor of due process, privacy and bodily autonomy?
Leaving aside the obvious recent example of Kyle Rittenhouse, let's discuss the presumed guilt of college age males (you know, the Dear Colleague business) or the logical conclusion of #BelieveAll(Progressive)Woman.
Privacy? Doxxing is literally the specialty of progressive media.
Bodily Autonomy? I mean, have we all forgotten the recent vaccine business that quickly?
Given Mrs. Jackson's confessed inability to define woman in a legal context, it would be reassuring and honorable if she would stipulate under oath that if confirmed she will recuse herself in any Supreme Court case bearing on gender or sexual matters.
Quaestor, you mean like how Justice Thomas did not recuse himself from the Jan 6 document case .... despite his wife being involved in the rally in question and in direct contact via text with high level WH staff (and Jared)?
Based on Thomas' example, no one should recuse themselves again.
Mark, no, I mean an honest recusal. I won't bother to elaborate on the subject of honesty, a concept way over your conical head.
Bullshit.
You cannot explain that away.
Freder @ 6:46
Not much of a marksman are you.
The "Democrat theory of jurisprudence" is mob rule, that if the constitution stands in the way of what they want, then toss it. Characterizing the Repub view as totally summarized by Roe v wade is simply insane. There is a case to be made that abortion is murder so not being happy about abortion is a moral stance (which you are free to disagree with). And what is this about telling you who you can marry (gay marriage ship has sailed and no repubs are trying to undo it)? It is Dems who favor laws and policies that violate your rights, not the repubs. Who wants to tell you that you can't drive a gasoline car? Who wants to teach elem kids about sex? Who wants to throw out the 2nd amend? Who mandates that you compost your food waste (in CA)? Which pres gleefully ignores federal court decisions? Hint: not trump.
If by "unenumerated rights" they mean the right to free medical care, the right to housing, the right to no climate change, the right to having a cell phone, then this is a sneaky way of saying judicial activism and yes, repubs (and myself) oppose that. It is a way of legislating from the bench.
By the way, I think Breyer is wrong that they can confirm a justice before he retires, because then what if he changed his mind? There would be 10 justices. He is trying to control the process which is not his right.
"unenumerated rights": gay marriage was based in the supreme court on the idea of the right to the pursuit of happiness--a pretty small foundation for such a big change. On this basis, one could justify marriage of 10 people together or marriage with children. Unenumerated rights have been used to support the "right" to abortion, to welfare, to free medical care--almost entirely the "right" to get free stuff. The dems oppose the right to self-defense, free expression, free assembly (note the attacks on male fraternities and clubs), all natural rights.
Blair said...
I am not certain as to why people are so certain that she will be confirmed . . . Even if a vote is forced, there is no guarantee that Sinema, Tester, Manchin, Murkowski, Collins or Romney would vote to confirm her. All that can be said is that she has better odds than not.
__________________________________________________
A lot of Democrats ought to be wondering what confirming her will do their chance of reelection. No matter how you spin it, her stance of collecting and distributing child pornography amounts to ‘That’s no big deal’.
From such candidate’s POV, not having her nomination come to a vote might be a great idea.
Am I the only person here who remembers that “substantive due process” was the excuse for the Dred Scott decision? And for the one that threw out the NY State minimum wage act?
"restricted access to birth control"??? If they mean abortion, that is a pretty slippery way of saying it. If they don't mean abortion, do they mean free condoms? Another "give me stuff". If not these, then it is a simple lie.
No matter what she said in the confirmation hearings, Jackson had to know that she was going to be confirmed, even if by a 51-50 vote, for a position with lifetime tenure and respect, yet she was still unwilling to publicly disavow the Cathedral's catechism on transgender issues. She literally had nothing to lose except social standing as a right-thinker.
I'm so, so glad I got used to being a pariah as a youth. My feelings can still get hurt but in general I don't care what people think about me.
There have been 8 Jewish supreme court justices. I don't recall any Jewish senators acting as cringeworthy when Jewish judges were nominated as Corey Booker did this week. Booker's parents were executives at IBM. Judge Jackson's father was a lawyer and her mother a school principal. Her husband is a surgeon. They're all practically the definition of Dubois' "talented tenth", part of the upper middle class black elite whose values today are indistinguishable from their WASP and Jewish classmates in the Ivy League, but let's hear about how hard they had to work to overcome systemic racism. GMAFB.
I'm beginning to think that it is social pressure, like Judge Jackson wants to avoid, that keeps the progressive plantation intact. Women are particularly sensitive to social stigmas.
"What is a Woman?" is neutron bomb level rhetoric but it remains to be seen if Republicans can act on it. It's a perfect wedge issue to peel women away from the progressive plantation. Make it socially acceptable for women to reject the trans movement as harmful to women.
Post a Comment