This deserves it's own thread

[Bunnykid68]

Rambone posted this in another thread and it makes such a good point about Supreme Court Justices I thought it deserved it's own thread



So which party do I need to vote for to make sure the constitution is defended on the SCOTUS?


NO to warrantless dog searches of private property
Antonin Scalia (R, Reagan)
Elena Kagan (D, Obama)
Sonya Sotomayor (D, Obama)
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (D, Clinton)
Clarence Thomas (R, Bush I)

YES to warrantless dog searches of private property
Samuel Alito (R, Bush II)
John Roberts (R, Bush II)
Anthony Kennedy (R, Reagan)
Stephen Breyer (D, Clinton)


Court opinion and story http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/03/opinion-issued-in-florida-v-jardines/

 

[IndyDave1776]

So much for 'vote for Romney to prevent Obama from appointing another justice to the SC'.

 

[USMC-FF]

I was very surprised with the way the justices voted as well. Kinda makes you wonder!

 

[churchmouse]

What just happened. Could someone up there actually be awake for a change.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

Can't we all agree that they all do poor jobs of preserving our innate rights to various degrees?

Would you trust any Supreme Court justice with your safety or health or freedom?

If not, why are they in a position to speak on and issue edicts as to what constitutes which?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Can't we all agree that they all do poor jobs of preserving our innate rights to various degrees?

Would you trust any Supreme Court justice with your safety or health or freedom?

If not, why are they in a position to speak on and issue edicts as to what constitutes which?

Because this country keeps putting asshats in charge that make these decisions for us.

 

[Trooper]

Just remember that even if a republican nominates a person for justice, the left has been very effective in blocking anyone who believes like you. Look at Robert Bork. Thus we get only republican nominees who the democrats like.

 

[No2rdame]

The problem is that too often both Dems and Repubs nominate in justices that side with the Prez on only a handful of decisions. A SC justice nominee may be selected if he or she is anti-abortion or pro-legalization of something, depending on what the president's agenda is.

What is sad is that they are supposed to be impartial judges of the law, yet their egos and opinions always get in the way.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

Can't we all agree that they all do poor jobs of preserving our innate rights to various degrees?

Now if only we new how a libertarian would have voted

 

[Bunnykid68]

Now if only we new how a libertarian would have voted

I would guess in this decision they would be with the majority of the Dem justices

 

[lucky4034]

What just happened.

The Democrats just saved Pot Smokers ass...

 

[traderdan]

John Roberts is a real disappointment.

 

[ZombieApocolypse]

I would guess in this decision they would be with the majority of the Dem justices

Damn Dems always trying to take away our rights and .... wait what?

 

[rooster]

link is broken

 

[Bunnykid68]

link is broken

Link has been replaced

Opinion issued in Florida v. Jardines (Updated) : SCOTUSblog

 

[actaeon277]

This is one decision.
I'd like a few more data points for statistical analysis to have a better sampling.

 

[5.56'aholic]

What is sad is that they are supposed to be impartial judges of the law, yet their egos and opinions always get in the way.

Couldn't have said it better. This is the true cause for the variability in the voting. It seems the only time they side with the law/constitution is when it doesn't matter to them personally. Same goes for both sides.

 

[Bunnykid68]

This is one decision.
I'd like a few more data points for statistical analysis to have a better sampling.

I agree, but this one decision about a right a lot of us here appreciate does say a lot.

 

[88GT]

I agree, but this one decision about a right a lot of us here appreciate does say a lot.

Not as much as you would think. How many INGOers send their children to government schools and still preach about personal responsibility? How many of the most vocal opponents of government entitlement spending do it?

Is it mere oversight or hypocritical coincidence that only one of them ever posts in the education threads?