Political News Political Books Political DVDs Political Software
»User: »Password:   Remember Me? 

Political Discussion / Politics / General Political Discussion / Recent Supreme Court Rulings

Posted:  04 Oct 2007 15:58
It would seem that the supreme court is starting to lean a bit more conservative.

http://www.christianlaw.org/content/view/520/61/


Faith-Based Initiative Challenge

The Court’s ruling in Hein denied standing to a tax payer who challenged expenditures of taxpayer funds for religious organizations.  The Court said that taxpayers do not have grounds to challenge Executive Branch expenditures.  Chief Justice Roberts, along with Justices Scalia and Alito, in a concurring opinion, noted that if taxpayers could challenge government expenditures just because they didn’t like them, the federal courts would run the risk of becoming “general complaint bureaus.”

On the bong hits for Jesus case
Justice Roberts, again writing for the Court’s majority, said: “We hold that schools may take steps to safeguard those entrusted to their care from speech that can be reasonably regarded as encouraging illegal drug use.” 

A common sense ruling for a change. The ruling pointed out specifically that the speech promoted drug use. It didn't condemn the right of free speech involving ideas in general.
__________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted:  04 Oct 2007 16:03
Quote:
The ruling pointed out specifically that the speech promoted drug use.


It was a joke and though it used pot, it didn't endorse drugs.

Quote:
The Court said that taxpayers do not have grounds to challenge Executive Branch expenditures.


That's just scary. Wait til you get a democratic president in office again and think about that ruling.
Posted:  04 Oct 2007 16:25
Then we shall have more gridlock I guess.
__________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted:  04 Oct 2007 16:32
PLus, if you look at that ruling, they don't argue it for or against its merit … the Court ruled that taxpayers couldn't dispute the president's spending.

So, it's more of a backdoor victory. Fair enough, but dripping in legal wrangling and not the issue. If the ruling favored the other side, using the same process, it would be known as "judicial tyranny."