MLK, Jr Day

Today we celebrate the life and times of Martin Luther King, Jr a great civil rights activist….as important as that is I remember him more for his opposition to war especially the Vietnam War….a war that I know all too well.

So my post will be about the man and his anti-war thoughts and speeches…..

On July 2, 1964, Martin Luther King Jr. stood behind President Lyndon Baines Johnson as the Texan signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Although not the first civil rights bill passed by Congress, it was the most comprehensive.

King called the law’s passage “a great moment … something like the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation by Abraham Lincoln.” Johnson recognized King’s contributions to the law by gifting him a pen used to sign the historic legislation.

A year later, as Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 into law, King again joined the president for the occasion.

But by the start of 1967, the two most famous men in America were no longer on speaking terms. In fact, they would not meet again before King fell to an assassin’s bullet on April 4, 1968.

King was foremost a minister who pastored to a local church throughout his career, even while he was doing national civil rights work. And he became concerned that his political ally Johnson was making a grave moral mistake in Vietnam. Johnson quickly escalated American troop presence in Vietnam from 75,000 to 125,000 in 1965. And by 1968, more than a half a million troops were stationed in the Southeast Asian nation.

https://theconversation.com/how-the-vietnam-war-pushed-mlk-to-embrace-global-justice-not-only-civil-rights-at-home-169916

I remember his words and after experiencing war first hand I too became an anti-war activist…..

America is not in the habit of remembering King as an anti-war resister. We prefer to hold him up as a peace lover in a vacuum, a pacifist taken out of context from the time and place in which he lived, in the midst of what he deems to be an unjust war in Vietnam. But in his radical 1967 speech “Beyond Vietnam,” given before a crowd of 3,000 people crammed into New York City’s Riverside Church, the reverend shored up two years of protests into his most comprehensive statement against the war. He called for a worldwide fellowship that moved beyond tribe, race, class and nation, and he condemned a war that sent young black men 8,000 miles to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not yet found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem.

Even as King spoke of the need for an all-embracing and unconditional love for all mankind, he knew that his words would be dismissed as cowardice and weakness. `I am not speaking of some sentimental response,’ he insisted. `I am speaking of that force which all of the great religions have seen as a supreme unifying principle of life.’

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php

MLK was a great man and a great civil rights leader but he should also be celebrated for his work as an anti-war activist as well.

Have a great day…..

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

Vigilantes On Parade

Have you noticed in the past 10 years the amount of vigilantes hitting the streets has increased.

The individuals and groups that have been taking to the streets in the name of ‘freedom’….and the incidents of actual violence is increasing exponentially…..the most recent example is the trial of Rittenhouse….

The Wisconsin ruling clearing Kyle Rittenhouse on all charges for the killing of two Black Lives Matter activists looks to be a milestone moment for the rise of rightwing extremism in America. It’s not so much the details of this case and the spin that can be employed in interpreting the events that concerns me most. It’s the implications of the case, considering the larger political context and the threat of rising extremism.

A dangerous precedent has been set in this ruling, empowering vigilantes who believe they are deputized to enforce “the law” against perceived political enemies. Rittenhouse traveled to a city that he didn’t live in, to a state in which he is not a resident, while illegally possessing an assault rifle he had no right to wield, in the name of “protecting” property he didn’t own, in the process killing two men in violent altercations that would have been avoided entirely if Kenosha police had done their job, corralling vigilantes who looked to commit violence, and separating them from those engaged in protests or destruction of property. Even for those who are fixated on the property damage question, it’s difficult to defend Rittenhouse’s actions when he engaged in vigilante violence, with no training in dealing with conflict situations, and when responsibility for enforcing the law clearly falls on the police.

The Rittenhouse case shouldn’t be interpreted in a vacuum, as it occurred within a larger political environment in which other rightwing vigilantes seek to justify violence, and even murder, under the guise of “self-defense.” Consider, for example, the Ahmaud Arbery case in Georgia, where three white vigilantes stalked, cornered, and shot a black man who was jogging through a neighborhood – and away from them – under the false premise that he may have been responsible for a local burglary. There is no plausible scenario in which these three men can reasonably claim self-defense, when the altercation was entirely of their own initiation, when the man murdered was unarmed, and when he had nothing to do with the crime in question. And of course, there is the issue of implicit or explicit racial bias related to the defendants, which is also difficult to ignore in a country where research shows that assumptions of guilt related to violent crime are consistently racialized, with black men assumed to be the prime perpetrators in violent and other criminal acts. If the Arbery defendants successfully justify their actions as “self-defense,” then the courts will have effectively criminalized being black in America. An acquittal sends a message that white vigilantes can commit violence and murder at will against people of color who have the nerve to venture out into public, and with black men’s mere existence constituting a “threat” from which white people need “protection.”

Vigilantes on Parade: Rightwing Extremism and the Threat of National Implosion

All this does nothing to stop the social slide that has been developing over the last 25 years or so…..

None of this bode well for a orderly society and a stable nation.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Guns….Guns….Guns

The title ought to get the thoughts flowing.

Just a short note–Let me say there…..I own guns I have no problem with others doing the same….my problem is assault weapons for the unwashed masses…..it is a lie that these are for ‘protection’….these weapons have one purpose.

These two articles are written by others and I just want to share…..

This is a thought on the gun control debate……

Expect the gun control debate in America to really get hot over the next 12 months as Beto O’Rourke runs for governor of Texas. O’Rourke said, when running for president in 2019, “Hell yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47!”

And it’s entirely time for this debate. America has just a bit more than 4 percent of the world’s population, but, with more guns than people in our country, we have more than 40 percent of all the guns in civilian hands in the world.

Specifically, as a Swiss-based research group found, there are “approximately 857 million civilian-held firearms in the world’s 230 countries and territories” and, as ABC News points out, in America there are “over 393 million firearms in civilian possession” as of 2017. About ten million more have been sold in the US since then: we are the only nation in the world with more guns than people.

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2021/11/23/go-ahead-take-their-guns-us-would-be-less-dangerous-place

Of course the 2nd will be the first thing the debate will bring forward…..

I have made my thoughts known on this amendment to the Constitution…..https://lobotero.com/2013/02/20/a-well-regulated-militia/

I read this piece on the 2nd……

As America grapples with a relentless tide of gun violence, pro-gun activists have come to rely on the Second Amendment as their trusty shield when faced with mass-shooting-induced criticism. In their interpretation, the amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms—a reading that was upheld by the Supreme Court in its 2008 ruling in District of Columbia. v. Heller. Yet most judges and scholars who debated the clause’s awkwardly worded and oddly punctuated 27 words in the decades before Heller almost always arrived at the opposite conclusion, finding that the amendment protects gun ownership for purposes of military duty and collective security. It was drafted, after all, in the first years of post-colonial America, an era of scrappy citizen militias where the idea of a standing army—like that of the just-expelled British—evoked deep mistrust.

The Second Amendment Doesn’t Say What You Think It Does

I also visit a couple of debate sites…this is one of the debates on one of the sites….

https://gun-control.procon.org/

Please do not shoot the messenger….I just want help the debate, real debate, move forward….

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

“Looters” Not “Victims”

Yesterday the news was a buzz from something a federal judge instructed a jury in the thug Rittenhouse’s trial…..

Kyle Rittenhouse’s trial starts Monday, and you won’t hear the two men he fatally shot during protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin, referred to as “victims.” The judge in the case has a standard policy barring people from being called “victims” until an actual conviction, USA Today reports, and he said that using the term in this case would be “loaded,” per the Washington Post. However, when prosecutors asked that defense attorneys be prohibited from referring to the two men as “looters, rioters, arsonists or any other pejorative term,” the judge declined to make such an order.

“Let the evidence show what it shows,” was all he said. Prosecutors argued the terms should not be used unless there’s specific evidence Joseph Rosenbaum or Anthony Huber engaged in those activities. Rittenhouse, who was 17 when the shootings took place last year, has pleaded not guilty to homicide in both of their deaths as well as not guilty to attempted homicide of Gaige Grosskreutz, who was shot and wounded. His lawyers are expected to argue he acted in self-defense amid protests over the police shooting of Jacob Blake. Columnist Will Bunch runs down the judge’s controversial history in a Twitter thread (that ultimately calls for his removal) here.

Seriously?

The dead will be put on trial to save the life of a murderer?

This sounds a lot like one of those ‘activist judges’ that conserv are so worried about…..

This should be sound grounds for an appeal to overturn the ruling…..

Does anybody ever heard of judge Hoffman?  Think Chicago 7 trial and the total bigotry of a presiding judge.

Let’s be honest….this is a judge wanting to effect the outcome of the trial….time for this slug to go!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

Is White Hegemony In Decline?

First that word–Hegemony.

According to Oxford Bibliographies, “hegemony comes from the Greek word hēgemonía, which means leadership and rule. In international relations, hegemony refers to the ability of an actor with overwhelming capability to shape the international system through both coercive and non-coercive means” (Norrlof, 2015). The Oxford English Dictionary defines hegemony in the following manner: “leadership, predominance, preponderance; especially the leadership or predominant authority of one state of a confederacy or union over others.”

For decades there has been a fear of the white domination of society was being slowly eroded away…..and the last census is proving that fear warranted….

William Frey, of the Brookings Institute, reports, “Yet most notable is the small decline in white population — the first in any census since 1790. During much of the nation’s history, white population growth mirrored the national growth rate, including a substantial slowdown during the Great Depression.”  He adds, “Yet, since the 1970s, white population growth has shown continued declines — plummeting to just 1.2% in 2000 to 2010 and now to a -2.6% loss (or over 5 million people) for the 2010s.”  And he notes, “Fewer births and more deaths resulted in a natural decrease (more deaths than births) for the 2010s decade, even before the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Frey goes further noting two parallel develops that compound the overall demographic shift.  “All of the nation’s 2010-to-2020 growth is attributable to people of color—those identifying as Latino or Hispanic, Black, Asian American, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Native American, and as two or more races,” he finds. Adding, “Together, these groups now comprise more than 40% of the U.S. population.”  In addition, “Between 2010 and 2020, the nation’s under-age-18 population registered an absolute decline of more than 1 million.  …. As a result, white Americans now comprise less than half of the nation’s under-age-18 population.”

The End of White Hegemony?

This fear has been driving conservative agenda for decades…..that lead to the unrealistic immigration policies of the recent past…..and during the reign of Trump all this angst came to a head….and continues today….

But not to worry Texans (go figure) have been called to defend the white demographics.

Charlie Kirk has been accused of having “a fraught relationship with facts,” and spreading conspiracy theories and outright falsehoods while being the founder and head of the right wing activist group Turning Point USA.

TPUSA may be best known for its now-former communications director who touted Hitler to defend the term “nationalism,” declaring that the “problem” with the genocidal Nazi responsible for the slaughter of up to 17 million people around the world was that he wanted to expand his reach beyond Germany: “if Hitler just wanted to make Germany great and have things run well, OK, fine. The problem is that he wanted, he had dreams outside of Germany. He wanted to globalize.”

Here’s Kirk declaring that Texas must “deputize” its citizens, and place them on the border to protect “white demographics in America” to fend off “the invasion.”

“Texas, whether they like it or not, are front and center smack dab in the middle of the great question of our time, which is who runs the country?” Kirk said Thursday on his radio show, as Media Matters reports, before he began to attack President Joe Biden.

“What do you do when you start to have a apathetic tyrant – no, apathetic when it comes to immigration law but very engaged when it comes to forcing vaccinations – what do you do?” Kirk asked. “Deputize a citizen force, put them on the border, give them handcuffs, get it done. Sure that’s dramatic. You know what’s dramatic? The invasion of the country.”

https://www.alternet.org/2021/09/charlie-kirk-2655088157/

Time for the people of this country to realize that we ALL are children of immigrants….the so-called Christian Right should lead this push but instead are the very ones adding fuel to the hatred fires raging in our society.

This saga will continue for decades to come…..

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

Political Courage Located

Closing Thought–21Oct21

States that are controlled by the GOP have been passing a whole array of bills that severely limit voting and health issues and education and it appears as if there is nothing that can be done to stop this curtailing of our rights….and then a glimmer of hope has broke through the political barriers being erected.

A few District Attorneys are refusing to prosecute some of the laws passed by the GOP….

When Republican lawmakers in Tennessee blocked a policy to ease up on low-level marijuana cases, Nashville’s top prosecutor decided on a workaround: He just didn’t charge anyone with the crime.

Meanwhile, in Georgia, the Gwinnett County solicitor vowed not to punish anyone for the crime of distributing food or water to voters in line. Tampa’s chief prosecutor says a law that allows law enforcement to detain protesters until their court date is “an assault on our democracy.” And a district attorney in Douglas County, Kansas, promised not to enforce a new state law that makes it harder for nonpartisan groups and neighbors and candidates to collect and return absentee ballots for voters.

Progressive prosecutors around the country are increasingly declaring they just won’t enforce some GOP-backed state laws, a strategy at work in response to some of the most controversial new changes in recent years — near-total abortion bans, voting restrictions, limits on certain protest activity, laws aimed at LGBTQ people, and restrictions on mask requirements.

https://apnews.com/article/crime-tampa-tennessee-nashville-787cae9774f5fa36797ce89bb25932a7

This is good news.

But we need more people with cajones instead of a few….people that will stand-up for the rights of all Americans not just the few.

This will continue to be a problem as long as the voter worried about issues that have nothing to do with a safe and secure and just society.

We are the solution.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

SCOTUS News

The Supreme Court is making the news almost daily…..many of us are calling for some sort of reform with the Court…..something has to be done to try and control these political hacks that are suppose to be neutral to the political antics of the political parties…..they are not.

One of my concerns is that these judges are not acting in a responsible way and are being unduly influenced by outside players….

In a letter to Roberts, Reuters reported, the Democratic lawmakers questioned whether Roberts had done enough in his role as the presiding officer of the Judicial Conference of the United States to uphold the integrity of the federal judiciary and enforce ethic rules.

Warren and Jayapal cite a Wall Street Journal report that revealed 131 judges failed to recuse themselves from cases involving companies in which they or their family members owned stock—a scope of ethics violations the lawmakers called “stunning.”
 
The letter cites legal precedents from the code of conduct that require judges to recuse themselves from all cases where financial interest is involved, calling the extensive ethic breaches, at least in part, “a direct result of the inadequate processes for judicial accountability.”
 
“These conflicts of interest have affected hundreds of cases and the integrity of the justice system,” the letter reads.
The letter references other instances in which Supreme Court justices similarly did not recuse themselves from cases despite potential financial conflicts, including through ownership of individual stock, as further evidence of a “systemic failure that requires accountability.”
 
Warren and Jayapal argued that their comprehensive ethics legislation—the Anti-Corruption & Public Integrity Act—if passed—would close the large gaps in the U.S. judicial ethics system by requiring public release of disclosure reports, overhauling the recusal system, and barring judges from owning individual stocks.
 
Biden put together a commission to look at the Court and suggest changes that could be made….(really this was a worthless time waste)…..

The first word from President Biden’s commission charged with exploring changes to the Supreme Court was mostly about what the panel hasn’t done. “The Commission did not attempt to discern whether the Court is beset by a crisis of legitimacy today, nor do we take a position on whether the Court’s independence is at risk or whether it has become too anti-democratic,” said a draft document released before a meeting Friday. The panel was asked to consider specific changes, but its final report, to be presented to Biden in mid-November, won’t included actionable recommendations, CNN reports.

That was more or less the plan, but the cautious, hesitant approach evident in the drafts still irritated people, mostly Democrats. “This was not even close to being worth the wait,” said Brian Fallon of Demand Justice, who criticized the “the paralysis-by-analysis” approach, per the New York Times. On one major proposal, adding members to the court, the drafts show members seem to agree that would be legal but not on whether it “would be wise,” per MSNBC. The documents cited polls showing the idea is unpopular. The commission is focusing too much on the politics of expansion and not enough on potential benefits, said Sherrilyn Ifill of the NAACP.

Many Republicans don’t want to see the panel doing anything more, saying expansion would upend norms and already has received too much attention, per the Washington Post. “Far-left progressives are clearly trying to expand their political power under the guise of ‘court reform,'” said Kelly Shackelford of First Liberty Institute. Two conservatives quit Friday, leaving 36 members on the panel. Although the commission sidestepped the legitimacy question, a Gallup Poll in September found the Supreme Court’s approval rating down to 40%.

There’s more support for imposing 18-year term limits on justices. But members aren’t sure how that could be done. It might take a constitutional amendment, or maybe just a statute. Some members don’t want to do anything that could “encounter so many constitutional problems.” Biden threw cold water on that idea anyway on Friday night when he was asked if he supports term limits. “No” was his answer. Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law expert on the panel, isn’t sure about term limits, either. But he worries about the effects of rejecting every potential improvement because of possible risks. “Many people, and I include myself in this, believe we are indeed in a ‘break-the-glass’ moment,” he said.

Did you really think that there was going to be any help by this Commission?  If so, then you have been asleep for the last 40 years.

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

Closing Thought–12Oct21

There seems to be a wealth of damning stories about the police acting in a pathetic display of disregard for the public.

As common as these incidents of police violence there is always one that is more disturbing than others…..this is one of those….

Police pulled over a man in Dayton, Ohio, telling him the stop was over tinted windows. In fact, police say they stopped Clifford Owensby because they were watching the house he had just left because they suspected drug activity, and they wanted a dog to sniff his car. They asked him to get out of the car, but Owensby, 39, who is paraplegic, said he could not. So they pulled him out of the car by his hair. Owensby told them that he didn’t have the use of his legs, and said he would file a lawsuit if they touched him without a good reason. He asked to make contact with a supervisor, which apparently upset the police officer he was talking to. “You can cooperate and get out of the car, or I can drag you out of the car,” he said heatedly. Owensby still resisted getting out without trusted assistance. “You can hurt me,” he can be heard saying in bodycam video released by the City of Dayton.

In the video, one officer grabs Owensby’s arm while another grabs his hair and uses it to pull him out of the car. Owensby cries out in pain, then yells: “Somebody help! I’m a paraplegic.” Once Owensby is sprawled on the ground, one officer holds him down with his knee, then police cuff his hands behind his back and drag him to their cruiser. Owensby’s shoes fall off, which another officer throws at Owensby’s car, missing once. “Can y’all call the real police, please?” Owensby can be heard pleading. Authorities say they later found a bag with $22,450 in it and claimed a dog indicated the cash could have been near drugs at some point, CNN reports. The money, Owensby said, was his savings, and officers did not make any drugs or weapons charges.

The video “is very concerning to me,” Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley said, per the Dayton Daily News. “No matter where you live or what you look like, everyone deserves to be treated with dignity and respect when dealing with Dayton police,” Whaley said. The Dayton police department’s interim chief, Matt Carper, said, “We need to do better,” in response to video of Owensby’s arrest. That arrest, according to the Dayton Fraternal Order of Police Lodge No. 44 is, in fact, what Dayton police are trained to do. “The officers followed the law, their training, and departmental policies and procedures,” Jerome Dix, chapter president, said in a statement. “Sometimes the arrest of noncompliant individuals is not pretty,” he said. Owensby ultimately was cited for having a child unrestrained in the back seat, and for the tinted windows.

Procedures?

Treat a person that has NO use of his legs with disrespect and violence should not be acceptable in any form.

When will the American stop being so compliant to the violence and brutality?

Most officers may be the most trustworthy and  compassionate of people but all it takes is one a/hole to label them all as abusive.

Time for a change….immediately.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

 

“Those Godless Commies”

Once again I can thank my friend over at….https://www.theindependentknight.com/ to give me food for thought….https://www.theindependentknight.com/trumpian-politics/the-second-amendment-protects-america-um-from-what-exactly/

The title could be about anything the idiots on the Right want to bitch about…..but in this case it is about the attempts to get some gun reforms…..since Biden is president as of this writing we will look at his lame attempts at reform…..

Biden-Harris Administration is announcing a comprehensive strategy to combat gun violence and other violent crime. This strategy implements preventative measures that are proven to reduce violent crime, and attacks the root causes – including by addressing the flow of firearms used to commit crimes.

This strategy will use the Rescue Plan’s historic funding levels and clear guidance to help state, local, territorial, and tribal governments get the money they need to put more police officers on the beat – with the resources, training, and accountability they need to engage in effective community policing – in addition to supporting proven Community Violence Intervention programs, summer employment opportunities, and other investments that we know will reduce crime and make our neighborhoods safer.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/23/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-comprehensive-strategy-to-prevent-and-respond-to-gun-crime-and-ensure-public-safety/

Those godless commies are coming for your guns…..was the expected tagline for the idiots…..

Really?

With this limp dick approach nothing will….even if it was a stronger response it would still be ineffective.

Why you ask?

Media outlets love reporting the results of polling on hot-button policy issues, but they rarely tell you if the people supporting proposed legislation (especially when it’s restrictive) are the same people who would be affected by it. That matters in several important ways, not least of which is that getting a law passed is not the same thing as getting people to obey. Nowhere does that matter more than in the heated debate over gun laws.

“Fifty-seven percent of registered voters in the March 24-26 survey said there should be more laws regulating guns in the country,” The Hill reported earlier this year of the results of a Hill-HarrisX poll. That the story might be a little more complicated is hinted at later in the article where the numbers are broken down along partisan lines to reveal that 79 percent of Democrats support tighter gun laws, but only 36 percent of Republicans agree.

Why does the partisan divide on gun policy matter so much? Because gun ownership has traditionally been divided just as starkly along partisan lines, “with Republican and Republican-leaning independents more than twice as likely as Democrats and those who lean Democratic to say they own a gun (44% vs. 20%),” according to 2017 polling by Pew Research. That may indicate an ideological difference, or it may be evidence that familiarity with firearms encourages a more relaxed attitude towards their legal status, or both. Whatever the reason for the deep disagreement, enforcing “tighter gun laws” would require the cooperation of the people who actually possess them and oppose such policy changes.

Don’t Be Surprised if Gun Owners Don’t Comply With Gun Control Laws

In case my readers needs some info on the gun facts……https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/

This is a letter challenging the right to private ownership of guns…..

***Do Not Shoot The Messenger…This Is Someone’s Opinion….Not Mine….***

Those who believe the 2nd Amendment supports private gun ownership are long on opinions and short on facts, as is shown by J.T. Coyote’s letter published in July. Actually,Mr. Coyote’s letter was somewhat confusing as he first asserts the constitution does not “give” us the right to own and bear arms, but rather God does – even though the “right” to own personal weapons is not discussed in the Bible. Regardless, having dismissed the constitution as the genesis of this “right”, the remainder of the letter is indeed about the Second Amendment.

https://www.summitdaily.com/news/2nd-amendment-doesnt-support-private-gun-ownership/

Just some food for thought.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Next SCOTUS Session

If it’s October then it is time for SCOTUS to set their session docket…..it will be an interesting session since the American people think the court is doing a lousy job…

A new Quinnipiac University poll indicates that just 37% of Americans approve of the way the Supreme Court is handling its job, the lowest rating registered by the polling firm since they began tracking in 2004.

49% of Americans disapproved, while 13% had no opinion. Predictably, views on the nation’s highest court vary based on party affiliation; 47% of Republicans said they approved of how the court was handling its job, while 40% said they disapproved. 

(business insider)

The court has been a hot bed of political action….it has become a cabal of political hacks….to that accusation Roberts fired back with the court only concerns are judicial not political….

This from a court that was picked by the slime of the Federalist Society…..the court has been remaking society for decades….the court that gave corporations personhood….but it is not political…..

That said here is the new docket (partial docket)…

The Supreme Court has begun a momentous new term, back in the courtroom after a nearly 19-month absence because of the coronavirus pandemic. Eight of the nine justices took the bench at 10am Monday for the first arguments of the new term. Justice Brett Kavanaugh is participating remotely from his home after testing positive for COVID-19 late last week. Mississippi and Tennessee’s dispute over an underground aquifer is among today’s cases, reports the AP, with the court on Monday affirming a lower court ruling that said District of Columbia residents aren’t entitled to voting representation in the House of Representatives. The AP separately looks at the notable cases that will top this term:

  • Abortion. Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the Supreme Court’s major decisions over the last half-century that guarantee a woman’s right to an abortion nationwide. Lower courts blocked Mississippi’s ban on most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, but a more conservative Supreme Court has agreed to review those rulings. Arguments are Dec. 1.
  • Guns. New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn. v. Bruen is a case that could expand gun rights in the US and involves the right to carry a firearm in public. The case involves New York’s restrictive gun-permit law. New York state is among six states that limit who has the right to carry a weapon in public. Arguments are Nov. 3.
  • State secrets. United States v. Zubaydah and FBI v. Fazaga are two cases that involve what the government claims are “state secrets.” The first case the court will hear involves a Guantanamo Bay detainee who a lower court said was tortured in CIA custody. He’s seeking information from two former CIA contractors. Arguments are Oct. 6. The other state secrets case involves a group of Muslim residents of California who allege the FBI targeted them for surveillance because of their religion. Arguments are Nov. 8.
  • Boston Marathon bombing. United States v. Tsarnaev is the Biden administration’s effort to have the death sentence reinstated for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Arguments are Oct. 13.
  • Campaign finance. Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate is a challenge by Sen. Ted Cruz to rules about limits on repaying a candidate for federal office who loans his or her campaign money. Cruz made a loan to his campaign above the limit of $250,000 expressly to challenge the law. He won in a lower court. Arguments haven’t been scheduled.

Bold Justice: SCOTUS is back in session!

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/04/1041713663/the-supreme-courts-conservatives-cook-up-a-stew-of-abortion-guns-religion-and-mo

But look at the docket….abortions, gun rights, business, religious rights…..sounds political to me.

Whatcha think?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”