|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$16.00
 . '/' . substr('9781416583936',-6,3) . '/' . '9781416583936' . '.jpg'; ?>)
By Annia Ciezadlo
26.00
$22
|
|
|
|
|
Hurrah for the Garden State, whose state Supreme Court ruled today that same-sex couples are entitled to “the same rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples under the civil marriage statutes.”
|
|
Did you know that airline officials can’t force you to show your ID before a flight? Every sign you see at U.S. airports that says otherwise is false. Also, the regulations governing this area are being kept secret from the public. Read about the man petitioning the Supreme Court to shed light on the situation.
|
|
Testifying before Congress yesterday, the Justice Department’s top lawyer had a succinct answer to a question posed by a senator about whether Bush was wrong or right in his interpretation of the Supreme Court’s Hamdan case: “The President is always right.”
|
|
Constitutional expert and best-selling author Glenn Greenwald reminds us that the Supreme Court’s Hamdan decision not only outlawed Bush’s military tribunals, but also removed any conceivable argument to support Bush’s illegal wiretapping programs.
Greenwald: “Journalists should begin asking the Justice Department every day what their legal justification for warrantless eavesdropping is now that Hamdan has rendered frivolous their prior legal arguments in defense of the President.”
|
|
By Marie Cocco — As we celebrate our Independence Day, let us thank the Supreme Court for granting us deliverance from the tyranny of a president who tried to fashion himself king.
|
AP / J. Scott Applewhite
|
Truthdig salutes the 86-year-old Supreme Court justice who wrote the majority opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which struck down the military tribunals Bush set up to try Guantanamo detainees. But more important, this decision, in the words of a Yale law professor, “effectively undermines the Administration’s strongest claims about Presidential power,” and may constitute the legal framework necessary to halt the more egregious of Bush’s civil liberties-infringing programs—like warrantless wiretapping and holding terrorism suspects without trial.
|
|
The admiral in charge of the Guantanamo military detention center said he doubts Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling on presidential authority will have any effect on his operations. But a Bush administration lawyer wasn’t as sanguine, saying about the decision, “It’s very broad, it’s very significant, and it’s a slam.”
Posted on Jun 29, 2006
READ MORE 
|
|
In an analysis, the Washington Post says, “the Supreme Court has struck at the core of his presidency and dismissed the notion that the president alone can determine how to defend the country.”
|
|
Specifically, today’s Supreme Court ruling held that the president overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.
But more important, Think Progress interprets the ruling to mean that “the Authorization for the Use of Military Force—issued by Congress in the days after 9/11—is not a blank check for the administration.”
Also, SCOTUSblog says the ruling means that the Geneva Convention does apply to the conflict with Al Qaeda, and consequently “this almost certainly means that the CIA’s interrogation tactics of waterboarding and hypothermia (and others) violate the War Crimes Act.”
|
From MSNBC
|
The Supreme Court ruled that state legislators may draw new electoral maps as often as they like—meaning that we’ll likely see new gerrymandered voting districts every time there is a power shift at a state capital.
Disgustingly enough, this ruling is actually a vindication for Tom DeLay.
|
|
This is a complicated issue. We’ll let the Washington Post take it: “The Supreme Court struck down Vermont’s strict limits on campaign contributions and spending yesterday, in a splintered ruling that left intact the constitutional basis of current campaign finance laws but may make it difficult to put new curbs on money in politics.”
Posted on Jun 26, 2006
READ MORE
|
|
Samuel Alito’s conservatism has begun to make itself felt.
|
|
The court today ruled that First Amendment guarantees do not always protect government employees when they speak out pursuant to their official capacities—as opposed to as citizens speaking out on matters of public concern.
Here’s how SCOTUSblog interprets the ruling: “This apparently means that employees may be disciplined for their official capacity speech, without any First Amendment scrutiny, and without regard to whether it touches on matters of ‘public concern’—a very significant doctrinal development.”
|
|
Justice Antonin Scalia told fellow conservatives on Capitol Hill to butt out of the Supreme Court’s business in regards to using foreign law in its constitutional rulings. “It’s none of your business,” he said during a speech.
|
View the most popular tags overall?
|
|
Three Questions Left Unanswered by Obama’s Counterterrorism Speech
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
