"...Liberals have accused Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia of being the court's resident bully, but when two liberal female Suprem Court Justices--Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan--this week tried to browbeat Scalia and lawyers arguing against the Voting Rights Act's Section 5 pre-clearance requirement, the mainstream media hailed their efforts..."According to the Scotusblog (in legalese lingo), at issue is:
"...Whether Congress’ decision in 2006 to reauthorize Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act under the pre-existing coverage formula of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act exceeded its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and thus violated the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the United States Constitution..."In a nutshell (and you can read more about this from further explanation at: Voting Rights Act):
"...the Act prohibits states from imposing any "voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure ... to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color."[3] Specifically, Congress intended the Act to outlaw the practice of requiring otherwise qualified voters to pass literacy tests in order to register to vote, a principal means by which Southern states had prevented African Americans from exercising the franchise..."
Proponents of the challenge to certain requirements of the Act have asserted that:
"...Congress' decision in 2006 to reauthorize section 5 of the Voting Rights Act under the pre-existing coverage formula of Section 4(b) [sic] of the Voting Rights Act exceeded its authority under the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and thus violated the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the United States Constitution."Tony Lee reports that in effect, the two women Supreme Court Justices, Sotomayor and Kagan were in effect bullying Justice Scalia. He says:
"...Sotomayor, as a liberal Washington Post columnist noted, 'allowed the lawyer for the Alabama county seeking to overturn the law to get just four sentences into his argument before interrupting him...When Sotomayor would not relent, Justice Anthony Kennedy had to say, in remarks directed at her, 'I would like to hear the answer to the question.' ... When the lawyer started talking, Kagan then interrupted him. And in what was described as a 'breach of decorum,' Kagan interrupted Scalia's questioning to argue with Scalia directly on the bench...Sotomayor would not let Justice Samuel Alito get a word in as well, and Chief Justice John Roberts had to says [sic], 'Justice Alito,' to signal that he had the floor..."Lee documents that:
"...when the lawyer for Alabama was about to make his concluding arguments, Sotomayor allowed him four words--'Thank you, Chief Justice'--before aggressively interrupting him...'Do you think that the right to vote is a racial entitlement in Section 5?,' Sotomayor asked...Before he could explain, she interrupted by saying she had 'asked a different question.'...'Do you think Section 5 was voted for because it was a racial entitlement?' Sotomayor asked..."
Lee says at Breitbart:
"...And so it went, and the mainstream media that always describe Scalia as "acerbic" for his aggressive questioning did not judge Sotomayor and Kagan by the same standards. Instead, mainstream media outlets like the Washington Post said Sotomayor's and Kagan's performances proved they were 'ready for battle'..."Preview of things to come?
Get ready. You are witnessing the Obama "transformation" of the nation before your very eyes. Play close attention when he (Obama) tells you he is not a dictator.
I would continue to assert that Obama has not transformed our nation into a Socialist dictatorship with a Constitutional Republic facade, but has merely brought it out of the closet.
You can read more about Shelby County Vs. Holder HERE...
No comments:
Post a Comment