I didn’t have time to post on this tidbit last week, but interestingly…the left didn’t miss it.
Tucked in on A-6 or so of last Thursday’s Oregonian (old media, sorry no link), was a quick and dirty, one short column, on the Supreme Court decision Jones v. Flowers. It is not the facts in the case that interested me so much, but the fact that the big O acknowledged that Chief Justice Roberts sided with Jones, the property owner, against the State of Arkansas, who had attempted to seize his property for failure to pay his property taxes.
I was stunned.
Wasn’t Justice Roberts a racist? Sorry, implied to be a racist by demagoguering Dems?
From Sen. Ted Kennedy…
“Do you believe that Congress has the power to pass laws aimed at eliminating discrimination in our society? Or do you believe that our hands are tied, that the elected representatives of the people of the United States are without the power to pass laws aimed at righting wrongs, ending injustice, eliminating the inequalities that we have just witnessed so dramatically and tragically in New Orleans?”
We can all remember Teddy’s tone of voice in the implication that Justice Roberts was truly the latter trying to be the former.
Remember Kennedy piling it on with…
“In Brown, decided in 1954, the year before you were born, the Supreme Court concluded unequivocally that black children have the constitutional right to be educated in the same classrooms as white students. The court rejected the old doctrine of separate but equal, finding that it violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
In considering the issues raised by Brown, the court took a broad and real-life view of the question before it. It asked, "Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though physical facilities and other tangible factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities?"
So do you agree with the court's conclusion that the segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race was unconstitutional?”
Kennedy tried to box Roberts in, any disagreement, even a rationally based Constitutional objection, would have boxed Roberts into the racist pigeon hole.
From slow Joe Biden…who implies a prejudice against women…
“Judge, is gender discrimination, as you've written in a memo, a perceived problem or is it a real problem?”
And from Sen. Feingold who implies he is a mindless roboton for government and corporatations…
“And I'm a little concerned that you seem to consistently argue for making it harder to bring Section 1983 lawsuits. In briefs you have filed, you advanced a series of arguments to effectively reverse decades of Supreme Court decisions and restrict Americans' ability to enforce federal statutory rights under Section 1983.”
So, we are left with is this pattern of innuendo, that implies that Justice (then candidate) Roberts is at best not an independent thinker, and at worst…which is what the esteemed Sens. Kennedy, Biden, and Feingold were trying to project, or better, slime onto Roberts, the titles of bigot, woman hater, and stooge for “the man.”
Justice (then nominee) Alito was not immune...from Leahy's opening statement the smear was clear...
"Supreme Court nominations should not be conducted through a series of winks and nods designed to reassure a small faction of our population, while leaving the American people in the dark."Teddy doesn't disappoint with a nice smear in his opening statement as well...
"In an era where the White House is abusing power, is excusing and authorizing torture and is spying on American citizens, I find Judge Alito's support for an all-powerful executive branch to be genuinely troubling."From the ever brilliant Feinstein...as fair as ever...Alito gets accused of being a racist...
"When you served in the Solicitor General's Office during the Reagan administration, you argued in three cases against the constitutionality of affirmative action programs. Then once on the 3rd Circuit you sided against the individual alleging discrimination in about three-quarters of the cases before you."As we all recall, these kinds of slanders were precipitated upon both of these Justices during their hearings (search here for all the transcripts), and they, and their service, and their potential future service to this country, were slandered by the worst elements of the Democrat Party, who abandoned all truth in favor of hostility and domegoguery in an effort to thwart their nominations to the highest court in the land.
So when Roberts rules with the most liberal justices, in a 5-4 split, for Jones in a property retention case, I am awaiting the public apology he deserves. Read the case...it is a close argument about whether Jones was negligent in getting his taxes paid, and Roberts cuts him major slack and is the decisive vote in him retaining his property. I might as well wait for Godot...I have yet to see a Senatorial apology.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised...they could have apologized the day before when both Roberts AND Alito ruled in favor of "the little guy." They favored the government erring on the side of the plantiff in a case that revolved around calendar accounting in regards to time limits on habeus corpus petitions for those convicted under ADEPA legislation. Both Roberts and Alito ruled with, for all you doomsdayer, naysayer, slandering liberals...Ginsberg, Souter, and Kennedy.
I guess it would be too much to recognize that these two gentlemen did exactly what they said they would do...rule with fairness, based on the merits of the case. It is obvious that they did not carry into these proceedings the types of biases they were accused of.
It is a shame the Dem Senators can't say the same.
Sad, but predictable.