Justice Thomas's howler - based on zero evidence - that parents can't give informed consent because doctors undermine it by recommending gender affirming care ought to be enough to put him off any bench. It's one thing for a conservative opinion writer to spout such malicious rubbish but it's disgraceful coming from a judge.
The ultimate aim is to promote Christofascism and more dangerously, coronate Trump. The teachings of Jesus are nowhere to be found in these rulings, not that they’re supposed to inform our secular juris prudence, but the overarching commitment to providing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is thrown into the garbage pit.
Even though I’m a devout atheist, the Beatitudes resonate with me because they exemplify how we, as rational humans, need to behave towards each other.
Matthew 5:3–12:
Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the Earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called the Sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you...
And in Matthew 25:
‘I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’
To me, simply an old hag, whose immediate family, since my human blood family embraced t***p and his God forsaken “agenda”, consists of two cats, I now believe that I could be at risk for arrest, detention, inhumane treatment and eventual deportation or permanent imprisonment. My crimes are many, but the most agrevable have now been green lit by all three branches of my government. They include, not in any order of legal or religious abhorrence, 1) Being a somewhat elderly single woman who adopted two cats, 2) Proudly being a descendant of Irish and German immigrants and unsure of said ancestor’s immigration status upon arrival in America and Canada, 3) Chose to accept Jesus Christ as my savior and am now a lapsed evangelical christian who doesn’t attend any church, 4) Retired federal civil service employee, 5) Military enlisted service member of 16 years and one War, not receiving any type of military service annuity, receiving minimal veteran’s benefits, 6) Gasp! Receiving Social Security and CSRS annuity, 7) Lifelong unapologetic centrist Democrat, 8) Radically left-handed knitting artist, 9) Did I mention my two cats? and 10) Vocal and sarcastic public and private, spoken and written expounder of personal beliefs and non-t***pian philosophical ethics, morals and simple sanity and humanity when in contact with folks not like me. Oops, can’t leave out # 11) recent wheelchair and rolling walker user due to several unplanned medical events. There’s more crimes (felony and misdemeanor) to enumerate, but I didn’t want to go on about them. Wait, wait! 12) Not being a millionaire or having piles of stocks and bonds with which to pay a team of consultants and lawyers when I have to file my lawsuit to stop my own deportation. On the bright side, however, I do love to travel, and I’ve never been to South Sudan. So I’ve got that going for me.
Thank you for this, I feel this is the first piece I've read that captures my fury at the Robert's court writ large and these recent decisions specifically. It feels we're at the point where the entire lower level judiciary simply needs to be dismantled and all cases regarding Trump or the administration be sent directly to the Justices where they can quickly rubber stamp whatever odious policy is in play. This can't hold, it's unsustainable. The flood of evil about to be unleashed by the CASA ruling is going to shock the country. Also - someone (Lisa?) needs to write a book detailing the legacy of the Robert's court. As a whole, one of the most destructive Supreme Courts in our nation's history. Not quite Dred Scott or Plessy but give them time.
I'm not sure the "opt out" is all that unworkable. Leave the books available in a bookcase that says "read only if your parents have NOT opted out; No one with an opt out note on file can read these books." Go ahead and TEACH the books and tell kid's with opt-out notes they have to leave the classroom (at least in high school they can go to study hall- elsewhere, the lunchroom-- to write an essay on an "acceptable" substitute. Kids will figure out that they will be pariahs if they embrace their parents' bigotry.
Clearly the books on the bookshelf and in the lessons will have to be sensible choices that don't actually "indoctrinate" or contain truly age-inappropriate material, not to mention porn. Teachers aren't dumb: those are already weeded out.
It would be awkward, but I doubt the mass move to "opt out" would last long. It isn't really about protecting THEIR children; it's about forcing their beliefs on ALL children. Lose that goal and a lot of the incentive goes away.
In terms of the effects of its rulings on our democracy I believe this Court is even worse than Taney's. Most Courts reputations can be ruined by a single glaringly atrocious decision. This Court has now made three or four such and it's just getting started. God help us.
Indeed SCOTUS is determined to obliterate any and all civil rights progress made in the Sixties … EXCEPT Loving v. Virginia.
Well, they have already profited by the Sixties - only Gorsuch would be a proper Fifties justice; the rest, women and minorities, would never have been nominated - so best deny everyone else their treasure.
The thing that is, to me, the most horrifyingly stupid is that the Constitution is clear about birthright citizenship. It is not ambiguous, and everyone, including the conservative justices, knows it.
Justice Thomas's howler - based on zero evidence - that parents can't give informed consent because doctors undermine it by recommending gender affirming care ought to be enough to put him off any bench. It's one thing for a conservative opinion writer to spout such malicious rubbish but it's disgraceful coming from a judge.
The ultimate aim is to promote Christofascism and more dangerously, coronate Trump. The teachings of Jesus are nowhere to be found in these rulings, not that they’re supposed to inform our secular juris prudence, but the overarching commitment to providing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is thrown into the garbage pit.
Even though I’m a devout atheist, the Beatitudes resonate with me because they exemplify how we, as rational humans, need to behave towards each other.
Matthew 5:3–12:
Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the Earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be satisfied.
Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called the Sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you...
And in Matthew 25:
‘I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?
And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?
And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’
And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers,[a] you did it to me.’
In 1989, a chronically disillusioned and extraordinarily prescient Lou Reed sang:
Give me your hungry, your tired, your poor I'll piss on 'em
That's what the Statue of Bigotry says
Your poor huddled masses
Let's club 'em to death
And get it over with and just dump 'em on the boulevard.
Tragically, he's summed up the goal of the repuglikkan party, aided fully by the Roberts court.
To me, simply an old hag, whose immediate family, since my human blood family embraced t***p and his God forsaken “agenda”, consists of two cats, I now believe that I could be at risk for arrest, detention, inhumane treatment and eventual deportation or permanent imprisonment. My crimes are many, but the most agrevable have now been green lit by all three branches of my government. They include, not in any order of legal or religious abhorrence, 1) Being a somewhat elderly single woman who adopted two cats, 2) Proudly being a descendant of Irish and German immigrants and unsure of said ancestor’s immigration status upon arrival in America and Canada, 3) Chose to accept Jesus Christ as my savior and am now a lapsed evangelical christian who doesn’t attend any church, 4) Retired federal civil service employee, 5) Military enlisted service member of 16 years and one War, not receiving any type of military service annuity, receiving minimal veteran’s benefits, 6) Gasp! Receiving Social Security and CSRS annuity, 7) Lifelong unapologetic centrist Democrat, 8) Radically left-handed knitting artist, 9) Did I mention my two cats? and 10) Vocal and sarcastic public and private, spoken and written expounder of personal beliefs and non-t***pian philosophical ethics, morals and simple sanity and humanity when in contact with folks not like me. Oops, can’t leave out # 11) recent wheelchair and rolling walker user due to several unplanned medical events. There’s more crimes (felony and misdemeanor) to enumerate, but I didn’t want to go on about them. Wait, wait! 12) Not being a millionaire or having piles of stocks and bonds with which to pay a team of consultants and lawyers when I have to file my lawsuit to stop my own deportation. On the bright side, however, I do love to travel, and I’ve never been to South Sudan. So I’ve got that going for me.
Thank you for this, I feel this is the first piece I've read that captures my fury at the Robert's court writ large and these recent decisions specifically. It feels we're at the point where the entire lower level judiciary simply needs to be dismantled and all cases regarding Trump or the administration be sent directly to the Justices where they can quickly rubber stamp whatever odious policy is in play. This can't hold, it's unsustainable. The flood of evil about to be unleashed by the CASA ruling is going to shock the country. Also - someone (Lisa?) needs to write a book detailing the legacy of the Robert's court. As a whole, one of the most destructive Supreme Courts in our nation's history. Not quite Dred Scott or Plessy but give them time.
There's a great book out now titled Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes, By Leah Litman.
Another is The Supermajority: How the Supreme Court Divided America, by Michel Waldman
Ha - reading Lawless right now, Leah Litman is great.
Does that mean Barron Trump is a birthright citizen? Some of the Vance family?
A book that portrays a woman wearing pants will irritate some nutjob. Probably in Oklahoma. Or Alabama. Or Florida. Or Texas. Or…
“Keep yer Confederate money, boys; the South shall rise again!”
I'm not sure the "opt out" is all that unworkable. Leave the books available in a bookcase that says "read only if your parents have NOT opted out; No one with an opt out note on file can read these books." Go ahead and TEACH the books and tell kid's with opt-out notes they have to leave the classroom (at least in high school they can go to study hall- elsewhere, the lunchroom-- to write an essay on an "acceptable" substitute. Kids will figure out that they will be pariahs if they embrace their parents' bigotry.
Clearly the books on the bookshelf and in the lessons will have to be sensible choices that don't actually "indoctrinate" or contain truly age-inappropriate material, not to mention porn. Teachers aren't dumb: those are already weeded out.
It would be awkward, but I doubt the mass move to "opt out" would last long. It isn't really about protecting THEIR children; it's about forcing their beliefs on ALL children. Lose that goal and a lot of the incentive goes away.
In terms of the effects of its rulings on our democracy I believe this Court is even worse than Taney's. Most Courts reputations can be ruined by a single glaringly atrocious decision. This Court has now made three or four such and it's just getting started. God help us.
Indeed SCOTUS is determined to obliterate any and all civil rights progress made in the Sixties … EXCEPT Loving v. Virginia.
Well, they have already profited by the Sixties - only Gorsuch would be a proper Fifties justice; the rest, women and minorities, would never have been nominated - so best deny everyone else their treasure.
The thing that is, to me, the most horrifyingly stupid is that the Constitution is clear about birthright citizenship. It is not ambiguous, and everyone, including the conservative justices, knows it.