Saturday, June 14, 2008

What's really at stake in the November Presidential election? The direction of the Supreme Court and whether our Constitutional rights are protected!!

Yes, history is being made this year by who we chose as our next President. Some see the historical choices between whether we choose an African-American or our oldest President. But others see this election as a battle for the essence of our way of life: for the next President will most likely appoint at least one new Supreme Court Justice and possibly 2. This will determine many issues near and dear to the hearts of all Americans. Will the Court continue its right leaning direction where the right of habeas corpus was suspended? Will the Court eliminate the rights of people to determine what choices they are allowed to make regarding end of life decisions when those individuals can't decide for themselves, as was the case with the family of Terri Schiavo? Will a woman have dominion over her own body in deciding whether or not to continue an unwanted pregnancy? Will the Executive Branch have sole discretion as to renditions of foreign citizens off the streets of cities all over the world? Will the Executive Branch be allowed to determine when it wiretaps U.S. citizens without the approval of the FISA Court?

We are stuck with the likes of Anthony Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito for many years to come, as Supreme Court Justices serve for life. The next President will determine whether our Constitution is upheld or trashed, as has been the case these past 7 plus years under President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

Some decisions have been close as was the recent split decision of the Court regarding reinstating habeas corpus for detainees in Guantanamo. Sec. of Defense Robert Gates wants to shut down Guantanamo as he sees it as a stain on the reputation of the U.S. around the world. Both Barack Obama and John McCain also want to shut it down for similar reasons.

But here we have President Bush and Vice President Cheney who saw fit to bypass the law and put these prisoners there keeping them from our legal system and the scrutiny and fairness which our judicial system is known for throughout the world. They were allowed to do this by the Republican Congress and then supported defacto by the Democratic Congress, too afraid to challenge this President. The media was also complicit by not challenging this President often enough. It took regular lawyers trying to preserve the Constitution to take up the cause of these prisoners who don't really deserve it, to stand up and be willing to fight this battle, not for the prisoners but for our way of life. They believed the Constitution is important enough to fight for. Many on the right see them as unpatriotic. I see them as the most patriotic and I salute them all. We need all 3 branches of government functioning properly. We have had both the Congress and Executive Branch functioning terribly. We almost had the Judiciary branch doing the same if it were not for the 5 voting in favor of restoring habeas corpus and striking down 2 other times the Bush Administration's attempts of circumventing our Constitution.

So what is at stake in the election in November is enormous and will determine the kind of country we live in for the next generation. Get involved in this one as your life depends on it as does the very life of this blessed country. If you are not registered to vote make it a priority in your life.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Headline reads: Supreme Court rules against Bush for the third time. This time on Guantanamo prisoners rights!

Here's some detail: Guantanamo Bay inmates have constitutional rights and may seek release in federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a rebuke to the Bush administration and Congress on their handling of accused terrorists.

The justices, voting 5-4, said a 2006 law unconstitutionally stripped Guantanamo prisoners of the right to file so-called habeas corpus petitions. The majority, pointing to the six years that some detainees have spent in captivity, said a system of limited judicial review set up by Congress didn't adequately protect inmate rights.

``The costs of delay can no longer be borne by those who are held in custody,'' Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the majority. ``The detainees in these cases are entitled to a prompt habeas corpus hearing.''

Now back in September of 2007 I identified those Senators voting for Habeas Corpus rights for these prisoners and those voting against their rights. I reprint below from my earlier Blog posting on that day so you can make your determination who was right and were vindicated today by the Supreme Court. However, many ideologues will see the problem is the Supreme Court majority, as they were not Bus's appointees. This should be a rallying point for Democrats and Independents.

Sept. 20th 2007
The vote to restore Habeas Corpus was defeated today by 56 in favor of restoring it to 43 saying Naye. Sixty votes were need to end cloture. We can all be upset that it didn't pass but I would rather focus on something positive and that is to recognize those brave Republican Senators voting with the Democrats to restore it.

They include:

Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea

These above Senators deserve to be reelected in their communities.

BRAVO Senators!

Of the 2 Independent Senators only one voted with the Democrats:

Sanders (I-VT), Yea

Voting with the Republicans was Leiberman (I-CT), No

All Democrats voted in favor of the Bill.

If the tables were turned and any of these Senators had been incarcerated by our government without due process, they would have voted with the Democrats. Same is true if their kids were serving in Iraq, they would vote more frequently with the Democrats, not all but more of them.

They give us little choice as voters but to replace them in next years Election for their inflexibility on some common sense legislation.

Those voting AGAINST the bill to restore Habeas Corpus are these (who need to be replaced whenever they term is up):

Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Nay (Presidential Candidate)
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Not Voting
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Coleman (R-MN), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Craig (R-ID), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Nay
Domenici (R-NM), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Nay
Martinez (R-FL), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Nay (Presidential Candidate and former Prisoner of war)
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Nay


To read the entire article click here.

Labels: , , , , ,

Thursday, May 15, 2008

California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban

This is huge news in the San Francisco area, as the news is spreading quickly about this decision in a 3-2 vote, by the Court . This during an election year and at a time where Republicans opposed to Gay marriages will certainly be vocal in their disapproval. It may rally the base of the Right Wing of the Republican Party. But this news has been long overdue as seen by many and what has been seen as prevention of equal rights. Many who heard the news cried. It is a history making day for California.

To read the breaking news click here.

Labels: ,

Technorati Profile