To help us think, talk and teach about the rights and responsibilities of citizens in our democracy, we invite you to explore 100 milestone documents of American history. These documents reflect our diversity and our unity, our past and our future, and mostly our commitment as a nation to continue to strive to "form a more perfect union."
May 18, 2011
February 22, 2011
"this slim majority ... hurling bombs at our democracy"
"From behind the imposing marble walls of Washington's majestic Supreme Court building, this slim majority of five unelected, unaccountable government officials with lifelong tenure has been hurling bombs at our democracy. They've hit us with decision after decision enhancing the power of corporations at the direct expense of workers, consumers, local communities, our air and water, voters, the elderly, and... well, anyone and everyone who stands up in court to resist the rise of corporate hegemony in America...."
ACSblog - The Roberts Court’s Unabashed Activism on Behalf of Corporations: An Examination by Jim Hightower (Posted Feb 22 2011). [ Hightower Lowdown / By Jim Hightower. "Top 4 Victories Handed to Corporate America by the Supreme Court -- So Far" ... "Judicial activism" is way too tame a phrase for what Chief Justice Roberts & Co did here. This was a coup -- a plotted overthrow to enthrone corporate political interests." February 19, 2011 ]
See also "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed."
-- U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864
(letter to Col. William F. Elkins)
Ref: The Lincoln Encyclopedia, Archer H. Shaw (Macmillan, 1950, NY)
ACSblog | Supreme Court to Address Individuals’ Standing to Raise Tenth Amendment Challenges | American Constitution Society
By Martin Magnusson. Mr. Magnusson is an associate at Day Pitney LLP.In 1997, the United States Senate ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention, an international treaty that outlaws the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons. As a signatory to that treaty, the United States agreed also to criminalize private individuals' production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons. Accordingly, Congress enacted legislation that made it illegal for any person knowingly to "develop, produce, otherwise acquire, transfer directly or indirectly, receive, stockpile, retain, own, possess, or use, or threaten to use, any chemical weapon."
Thankfully, the United States has had few occasions to bring chemical-weapons charges under this law. One such prosecution, though, is currently before the United States Supreme Court, which will hear oral argument today in Bond v. United States.
The defendant in that case, Carol Anne Bond, was a microbiologist who had been married for several years but couldn't bear a child. When Ms. Bond's best friend announced that she was pregnant, Ms. Bond was excited. When Ms. Bond discovered that her husband was the child's father, though, her mood understandably soured. She vowed to get revenge against her one-time best friend and tried-at least twenty-four times-to poison her with lethal chemicals that she stole from work and ordered online.
via www.acslaw.org
February 08, 2011
On Health Care, Justice Will Prevail - NYTimes.com
Given the clear case for the health care law’s constitutionality, it’s distressing that many assume its fate will be decided by a partisan, closely divided Supreme Court.
THE lawsuits challenging the individual mandate in the health care law, including one in which a federal district judge last week called the law unconstitutional, will ultimately be resolved by the Supreme Court, and pundits are already making bets on how the justices will vote.
But the predictions of a partisan 5-4 split rest on a misunderstanding of the court and the Constitution. The constitutionality of the health care law is not one of those novel, one-off issues, like the outcome of the 2000 presidential election, that have at times created the impression of Supreme Court justices as political actors rather than legal analysts.
via www.nytimes.com
February 07, 2011
Federal judge set to tour new San Quentin death chamber - San Jose Mercury News
Nearly five years ago, a San Jose federal judge went on a highly unusual expedition to San Quentin's aging death chamber, eventually finding that the converted eerie green gas chamber was outdated and replete with potential problems for carrying out executions.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel will return to San Quentin, this time for a tour of the state's new and untested death chamber, built for nearly $900,000 and designed solely for lethal injections. With the visit, California will take a step toward resolving whether it can resume executions on a death row now brimming with nearly 720 inmates.
But it may prove to be a small step.
February 03, 2011
Immediate appeal set on health law : SCOTUSblog
UPDATE: The Justice Department issued a reaction to the Virginia announcement, indicating it prefers to let the appeals court proceed.
———————–
Virginia Attorney General Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II announced Thursday that he will seek an immediate appeal to the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the new federal health care law, bypassing review in the federal appeals courts. In a press release issued in Richmond, the state’s top legal officer said that no case can have “public policy implications more important than this case….That reinforces the fitting nature of our request for immediate review in the Supreme Court.”
[ Vegas SCOTUS projection ... 5 - 4 ... but who wins ]
January 12, 2011
January 05, 2011
Justice Scalia Writes Women Out of the Constitution | National Women's Law Center
The Constitution does not outlaw sex discrimination, Justice Scalia recently stated. (He also reiterated his long opposition to Roe v. Wade, calling the right of privacy a “total absurdity.”) The good news is that he said these things in the context of an interview with a law professor, rather than in a Supreme Court opinion. The bad news is that as a Supreme Court Justice, his opinion regarding the meaning of the Constitution is currently one of the nine in the world that matter most.
Justice Scalia’s reading of the Constitution is not only inconsistent with decades of precedent joined by both conservative and liberal justices finding that the Constitution prohibits governments from discriminating against women; it is also difficult to reconcile with the text of the Equal Protection Clause itself, which provides that “no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” But perhaps he does not understand women to be persons.
Justice Scalia explained that the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution did not intend to prohibit discrimination against women, and thus the Equal Protection Clause has nothing to say about it. Of course, the Fourteenth Amendment’s framers also did not understand themselves to be prohibiting racially segregated schools: if the Constitution’s meaning is measured purely by the understandings of its framers, Brown v. Board of Education was wrongly decided.
via www.nwlc.org
December 14, 2010
December 13, 2010
December 06, 2010
C-SPAN | Ninth Circuit Court to hear California Proposition 8 Case
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California found Proposition 8 unconstitutional under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, and entered an order permanently enjoining the enforcement of Proposition 8. The oral argument will be divided into two hour-long sessions with a brief recess in between. In the first hour, the parties will address each appellant’s standing and any other procedural matters that may properly be raised. In the second hour, the parties will address the constitutionality of Proposition 8.
Congress this week: Tax discussion, START treaty and the Dream ActTodayWith the lame-duck session ending in a couple of weeks, Congress continues to work on tax cuts, an extension of unemployment benefits and how to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year. They are also expected to address the New START treaty and the Dream Act. The Pentagon released its 10-month study of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy followed by hearings on the matter last week. The Senate could bring it up on the floor this month though it would likely face opposition by some Republicans. A temporary FY2011 Continuing Resolution (CR) was passed quietly last week that changed the expiration date of the existing CR from December 3 to December 18. Congress will need to pass the CR before mid-December; otherwise, the federal government could shut down. On Saturday, Senators failed to advance two Democratic proposals to extend the Bush-era tax cuts when they expire at the end of the year. Meanwhile, a small group of lawmakers from the House and Senate are continuing their negotiations off the floor in an effort to reach a compromise on extending the Bush-era tax cuts. The New START treaty has yet to be ratified by a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Republican Senator Jon Kyl (AZ) is currently opposing the treaty and asking for more guarantees that the government properly maintain the remaining nuclear arsenal. He also indicated that more time should be spent on the issue. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported on Friday that unemployment edged up in November to 9.8% percent. Congress has been working on extending unemployment benefits for months, but has yet to pass an extension. The Dream Act may also be taken up in the lame-duck session. The bill is aimed at providing certain illegal alien students who have graduated from high school the opportunity to earn conditional permanent residency if they join the military or attend an institution of higher learning.
via www.c-span.org
December 03, 2010
MP3
Windows Media
RealAudio 10
Transcript (PDF)Court, jail overload is putting true justice in doubt - USATODAY.com
"There's a huge crunch in the judicial system because of a lack of resources," said Margie Paris, dean of the University of Oregon School of Law. "The speed with which we're moving cases along and the quality of justice is really being compromised."
Paris and others cited three common problems:
•Tougher law enforcement without expansion of jail and court infrastructure;
via www.usatoday.com
