![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The plain simple truth is that this current government makeup is doing some pretty damn close things that could be construde as fascist and I will not stand for it. We were founded on checks and balances system, hence the 3 branch system. And the check and balances are *almost* non-exsistant. |
What she said!
Quote:
|
Well, We can only hope the new S C justice will be a Moderate as in Moderating between the Liberals and Conservatives!
Political gaming is getting out of hand. When are they "REALLY" going to start thinking about "THE PEOPLE" "Us"? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Sad record for Democrats
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/05/po...rtner=homepage
Article on how since Reagan appointed her, so much has changed. "Because of Justice O'Connor's conservative reputation on certain issues, some women's groups were wary of her at the outset, fearful that she would oppose legal protections for abortion and interpret federal laws addressing sex discrimination narrowly. But her rulings in those areas have generally found approval with women's groups." "In 1981, according to the American Bar Association, 36 percent of law school students were women. Last year, it was 48 percent." "A look at the courts shows the breadth of change across the quarter of a century bookmarked by Justice O'Connor's nomination and her retirement. In 1981, Mr. Reagan's first year in office, there were almost 700 active federal judges, and 48 were women, some of them semiretired. Today, according to the Federal Judicial Center, there are 201 women and 622 men among active federal judges. As late as the beginning of the administration of Jimmy Carter in 1977, there were fewer than 10 women on the federal bench, according to the administrative office of the federal courts." -Rudey |
Quote:
-RC --didn't even point out petty spelling/usage/factual errors! yay! |
Quote:
It will be interesting to watch the process unfold, though. I remember bits and pieces of the Thomas hearings, but not enough to have a full memory of the details. |
Rudey...
How is that a sad record for democrats? There are two women on the USSC. One was appointed by a Republican. The other was appointed by a Democrat. Are you saying that if Reagan hadn't appointed a woman to the court, women would not have made progress in their representation on the federal bench? Or even have gone to law school at all? I'm willing to give Reagan his credit for putting the first woman on the court but I really think it's a stretch to say that doing so precipitated the increase in women on the federal bench or in law schools. You might want to factor in some other events which had a much larger impact... Title VII... the women's movement... Title IX... some major anti-discrimination suits which opened up many prestigious jobs in the law which had previously been closed to women... just to name a few. |
Quote:
-Rudey --Feel free to read the article |
I don't even know what you mean by that...
|
On the same day Chief Justice Rehnquist releases a statement that he will not retire at this moment, some senators seem to be creating a "O'Connor for Chief Justice" bandwagon:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/...nor/index.html |
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050719/...co/scotus_bush
Looks as if the President has named his first nominee. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.