This was the case where the appelate judge had been elected to the state Supreme Court while the appeal was being appealed and then refused to recuse himself from deciding on his own decision, is that correct?

What did you expect from a state that encourages inbreeding?

Frist!

HAH! Not so much, Steerie!

Dayum

1.There’s too many mutha’uckas ‘uckin’ with my constitutional shi’.

That’s every Scalia opinion ever.

1.There’s too many mutha’uckas ‘uckin’ with my constitutional shi’.

I guess he dines frequently at Sylvia’s in Harlem. Bill O’Reilly probably owes the black community an apology.

Hey, West Virginia, nice mountains ya got here… shame if they got all blown up…

Hey, West Virginia, nice mountains ya got here… shame if they got all blown up…

Yeeeeeeeeeeea, like in a minin’ axeskident or somefin….you know, t’ings happen. Next thing you know, BOOM! and you gots slurry in your streams….

The decision will have the opposite effect. What above all else is eroding public confidence in the Nation’s judicial system is the perception that litigation is just a game, that the party with the most resourceful lawyer can play it to win, that our seemingly interminable legal proceedings are wonderfully self-perpetuating but incapable of delivering real-world justice.

How you can write that as a dissent when the issue was whether or not a company bought a justice is just baffling.

In the best of all possible worlds, should judges sometimes recuse even where the clear commands of our prior due process law do not require it? Undoubtedly.

Except this time, because Massey spent their $3 million and fucking well deserve to have their $50 million dollar bill reversed.

Yeah, what’s $3 million between friends? It’s not like that’s enough money to bias someone .

Noty going to bother looking it up, but Scalia is on record saying, I think it was in regards to Cheney? – “how could anyone even think that I could be biased?” Or something equally laughable.

PeeJ,

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0426-10.htm

The decision will have the opposite effect. What above all else is eroding public confidence in the Nation’s judicial system is the perception that litigation is just a game, that the party with the most resourceful lawyer can play it to win, that our seemingly interminable legal proceedings are wonderfully self-perpetuating but incapable of delivering real-world justice.

How you can write that as a dissent when the issue was whether or not a company bought a justice is just baffling.<

Not baffling at all. See, he’s saying that the actual legal facts of the case should not determine the ruling, thqat would be judicial activism. In true constructionist fashion, he points out that it’s the social effect of the ruling that most matters.

Say what?

Ah yes, the duck hunting triop. On which, I suspect, Scalia was informed of Cheney’s aim with a shotgun. Just to, you know, let him know about it.

Yeeeeeeeeeeea, like in a minin’ axeskident or somefin….you know, t’ings happen. Next thing you know, BOOM! and you gots slurry in your streams….

I think the worry runs a bit more to having slurry in the front parlor.

<i JUSTICE SCALIA, JUSTICE THOMAS, and JUSTICE ALITO

aka “The Three Stooges”, “The Usual Suspects” and “Those Fucking Conservative Douchebags”.

Allowing litigants to appeal a case in which the judge had a financial interest will errode all faith in the system. Put decisions on ebay! Invisible handz! One dollar, one vote, &c!

Why is “PDF” in parentheses, and “AP story” in brackets?

Why is “PDF” in parentheses, and “AP story” in brackets?

Why did you put both in quotes? PS: {No reason}.

My colleague’s majority opinion is fundamentally flawed as it does not directly and in great detail address a great number of hypothetical scenarios and questions I have raised upon reading it.

While I have not read the opinion, if the dissent’s argument does boil down to that, it’s not all that strange. Opinions – whether majority, dissent or concurrence – circulate among the justices before the decision is issued. Kennedy probably read the points Roberts raised in his dissent before the final majority opinion was issued. If Roberts’ objections were substantial, then Kennedy should have addressed them. I’m guessing they weren’t.

Hasn’t Scalia had conflict of interest problems himself in the past?

I guess you can’t expect a justice who has previously failed to recuse himself from voting on a case in which recusal is an issue …

Meanwhile, I cannot help but think that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, wouldn’t have made a better decision than the fab four did here …

$3 mil. for a judge is something, you have to admit.

$3 mil. for a judge is something, you have to admit.

Can’t afford a Judge of your very own? Our innovative new Rent-A-Jurist program is the affrodable and convenient way to get those court decisions you need!

Another shorter Scalia: People paying lawyers erodes confidence in the system more than people paying judges.

What fucking amazes me is that it was 5-4 in spite of the case being an astonishingly clear-cut one of extreme corruption. At least half of the highest court in the country is officially casting votes based on their utility to Team Kulturkampf, which happens to include coal mining company executives.

Scalia would probably find in favor of partial-birth abortion if it helped fuck over black children somehow.

What fucking amazes me is that it was 5-4 in spite of the case being an astonishingly clear-cut one of extreme corruption.

I just knew there was a reason I voted for Obama.

S,N! So relieved to hear that. I wuz very confuzed.

La stupidité ! Ca brûle !

“At least half of the highest court in the country is officially casting votes based on their utility to Team Kulturkampf, which happens to include coal mining company executives.”

They were not voting for the coal company execs (since both sides in the case were coal company execs), so much as voting for the general right of coal company excs to bribe judges. That was the key principle at stake.

They were not voting for the coal company execs (since both sides in the case were coal company execs), so much as voting for the general right of coal company excs to bribe judges.

Well, to be fair, they were voting for corrupt coal company execs – so I guess it was more of a decision on who ranked higher within Team Kulturkampf than anything.

Shorter Scalitomasbert Judicial Activism Complex:

The majority opinion may have the deeply injurious effect of discouraging judges from taking bribes.

These four should be relegated to the Burrito Supreme court as soon as possible.

(I know it’s an oldie. I still like it. Fuck you.)

Also, I’ve noticed a pretty stark trend post-Roberts in which the obscure magical incantations favored by Scalia have given way to overt, patent bullshit when justifying obviously a priori dissents and decisions. Roberts in particular seems to have the legal reasoning of a fucking child; he doesn’t go from incorrect premises correctly to incorrect conclusions, but jumps to incorrect conclusions out of nowhere as if by fucking hoodoo.

I don’t know how in the fuck he passed the establishment and continues to be regarded as a good jurist; he’s a pretty fucking strong candidate for impeachment in my book, ideology or no.

My colleague’s majority opinion is fundamentally flawed as it does not directly and in great detail address a great number of hypothetical scenarios and questions I have raised upon reading it.

Scalia = Troofie?

JUSTICE SCALIA, JUSTICE THOMAS, and JUSTICE ALITO
aka “The Three Stooges”, “The Usual Suspects” and “Those Fucking Conservative Douchebags”.

No… The Three Stooges are Scalia, Roberts, and Alito. Thomas is Joe Besser.

What fucking amazes me is that it was 5-4 in spite of the case being an astonishingly clear-cut one of extreme corruption.

What amazes me is that it wasn’t 5-4 the other direction, like every other case this egregious ends up being.

Well, to be fair, they were voting for corrupt coal company execs – so I guess it was more of a decision on who ranked higher within Team Kulturkampf than anything.

It’s too bad that somebody couldn’t set up the court docket so there are two cases being considered at the same time that come down to the same key principle, except that judging affirmatively in the former would be a clear “Pro-Liberal Decision”, and the latter would be a clear “Pro-Big Crime Business Decision”.

It would be funnnny to read the decision & dissents for those.

As some of you might remember from previous posts of mine, I got to be in the gallery to watch oral arguments at the SCOTUS last year.

Putting partisanship aside – seriously – you couldn’t believe the stupidity from the mouths of Roberts & Alito. Scalia was a bit more sane, as you might expect. But no one heard a peep from Thomas. He was too busy – again seriously – sleeping.

I have a simple question for you liberals. Why is it that liberals don’t place as much of an emphasis on Patriotism as Conservatives? I mean, I’ve heard of many liberals who’ve said they hate America. Cindy Sheehan and Michelle Obama just to name a few. I’ve heard the venomous anti-Americanism on air america and the leftwing bloggers and politicans equate American Soldiers to Nazis.

I have never once heard directly or heard of a Conservative who was not Patriotic. I don’t believe there exists an unpatriotic Conservative. Never had I heard a Conservative say they hate America or compare American Troops to Nazis. Never have I heard a Conservative say anything other then praises for America. I can’t say the same for liberals.

I have never once heard a Conservative speak out in favor of the “rights” of America’s enemies. But I’ve heard many liberals speak in defense of our enemies. From Rev. Wright to Michael Moore to Barack Obama himself.

On a previous thread you even site the “Don’t Tread on Me” Flags, as a sign of so-called Right Wing “craziness.”

So my question to you is why don’t liberals place as much of an
emphasis on Patriotism as Conservatives?

And also, why are liberals so quick to give our Nation’s enemies the benefit of the doubt and come to their defense, while condemning Our Nation’s Fighting Men and Leaders who are defending us?

but jumps to incorrect conclusions out of nowhere as if by fucking hoodoo.

Not magic hoodoo. Just the a priori principle of “My decision must help the rich get richer”

Except this time, because Massey spent their $3 million and fucking well deserve to have their $50 million dollar bill reversed.

Return equals 17 times investment?

Dat boy b’longs on Wall Street!

Thomas is Joe Besser.

Goddamn being at work or I’d link to the MST3K “Stinky Bomb” sketch.

Return equals 17 times investment? Dat boy b’longs on Wall Street!

I can just see titles of the business plans circulating on Wall Street. “Bribery averagd 24.7% return over the last 10 years”

Hey, John. You remember the first week of constitutional law? The whole thing about the “ripeness” and “standing”? How there needs to be an actual present controrversy between the litigants on an issue before the court decides on it? Remember? Yeah. That stuff was kind of important.

Scalia would probably find in favor of partial-birth abortion if it helped fuck over black children somehow.

Naw. Haven’t you heard the “abortion is the Holocaust for African-American womb-babies” talking point?

Scalia: too unfit to sit.
Oh-ay-0-ay-0
Too unfit to sit
Oh-ay-O-ay-O
Too unfit to sit.
Don’t hurt em Scalli.

Longer version of Justice Thomas’ dissent that actually contains a verbally expressed onomatopoeia:

THOMAS: (sigh) (rubs itchy scrotum against robe)

It’s heartening to know that the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court is a concern troll with an extremist agenda.

I can just see titles of the business plans circulating on Wall Street. “Bribery averagd 24.7% return over the last 10 years”

I think we all know that the return is a hell of a lot better than that. Politicians are not just whores, they are cheap and diseased whores.

How much do you suppose it took the bankster lobby to push through the Deregulate Usury Bankruptcy Bill? How about the TRAP TARP? Anywhere near the profits realized? A small fraction, I’d be willing to bet.

Not magic hoodoo. Just the a priori principle of “My decision must help the rich get richer”

Yes- he votes like a privileged white male intent on maintaining those privileges, which was exactly why he was nominated.

“So my question to you is why don’t liberals place as much of an
emphasis on Patriotism as Conservatives?

And also, why are liberals so quick to give our Nation’s enemies the benefit of the doubt and come to their defense, while condemning Our Nation’s Fighting Men and Leaders who are defending us?”

For much the same reason we don’t put capital letters on words on which they don’t belong.

Pretty amazing website there, Lord Hairy. Be a shame if something happened to it, like allowing dissenting opinions in the form of comments? But please, do go on about how you’re “Patriotic” and the rest of us are scum, it really helps your case.

So my question to you is why don’t liberals place as much of an emphasis on Patriotism as Conservatives?

And also, why are liberals so quick to give our Nation’s enemies the benefit of the doubt and come to their defense, while condemning Our Nation’s Fighting Men and Leaders who are defending us?

I’ll be sure to mention this to Pat Tillman when I see him in Heaven, sucker.

And not to be outdone by the Administration in quoting sacred books not written by King James, Brother Nino quotes the Babylonian Talmud.

“I have never once heard directly or heard of a Conservative who was not Patriotic.”

What? Slept through Tea Party Week on FOX?

1.There’s too many mutha’uckas ‘uckin’ with my constitutional shi’.

Flight of the Conchords reference! Huzzah!

“Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.”

“I don’t believe there exists an unpatriotic Conservative.”

Lord Harry–if you’re going to treat “Conservative” and “Patriotic” as synonyms, of course Liberals are going to look “Un-Patriotic”.

I have a hard time imagining anything MORE patriotic than calling bad politicians on their shabby actions…except maybe shooting the bastards*. If that’s offended you, too bad. Might I suggest you try one of the many dictatorships around the world where Patriotism(tm) in the form of unquestioning agreement with the Maximum Leader is mandatory?

*(NOTE TO NSA MONITORS. THE ABOVE IS INTENDED AS HYPERBOLE, NOT A PLAN OF ACTION.)

I don’t believe there exists an unpatriotic Conservative.

After eight years of “if you criticize the President, you hate America!!!!!”, you really want to go this route? Good luck with that.