I go away for one lousy week and look — we lost Sandra Day O’Connor. She’s been the swing vote on many State/Church votes, including the 10C vote that just passed. We still know Rhenquist is on the way out, but losing him pales to losing O’Connor, since she’s a moderate and he’s a conservative. If both go conservative, we’re looking at a change in the dynamic of the court and long-term damage to American Freedom, in my opinion.Now is a good time to call your senator’s office (DO NOT EMAIL) and leave a message:1) Stating you are a voting atheist constituent AND 2) Asking to protect the separation of church and state. It’s confidential, and damn important. It also takes five minutes. Go.
I copied and pasted this from http://www.dailykos.com blog site. I think it’s relevant to our discussion. Another point to consider is that O’Connor was appointed by Reagan I believe and was considered a conservative at the time, not moderate.
The Most Activist Judge: Clarence Thomas
by Hunter
Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 11:17:08 PDT
This New York Times op-ed by Paul Gewirtz and Chad Golder suggests an actual measure for what makes an “activist” judge:
We found that justices vary widely in their inclination to strike down Congressional laws. Justice Clarence Thomas, appointed by President George H. W. Bush, was the most inclined, voting to invalidate 65.63 percent of those laws; Justice Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Bill Clinton, was the least, voting to invalidate 28.13 percent. The tally for all the justices appears below.
Thomas 65.63 %
Kennedy 64.06 %
Scalia 56.25 %
Rehnquist 46.88 %
O’Connor 46.77 %
Souter 42.19 %
Stevens 39.34 %
Ginsburg 39.06 %
Breyer 28.13 %
One conclusion our data suggests is that those justices often considered more “liberal” – Justices Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens – vote least frequently to overturn Congressional statutes, while those often labeled “conservative” vote more frequently to do so. At least by this measure (others are possible, of course), the latter group is the most activist.
Bush has repeatedly praised Scalia and Thomas as model judges; one can infer, from that, that what Bush and the conservatives are really looking for are judges that “legislate from the bench”, overturning laws and overriding the will of Congress. Right?
As the editorial suggests, the entire Republican notion of “activist judges” is imprecise at best. To that I’d add silly, intellectually lazy, and more than infrequently completely dishonest. The religious right wants desperately to appoint “activist judges” who reshape laws according to religious conservative preferences. They just don’t want anyone else to point that out.
So let’s toss that Republican talking point down the nearest storm drain. Or start using it against them.
May I ask why calling is requested and not email. Calling gets the message to our rep much sooner?
Jim,
What you fail to write in your note is the laws that struck down are liberal crap laws that should be struck down. Less government is better. Half the laws on the books should be thrown out.
Why dont you speak on how liberal judges think private companies can take your land for private development. I hope the guy from CA that is going after Souter’s land gets it. We need a “Lost Liberty Hotel”
I understand she had to leave for personal reasons and I respect that, but CRAP, the dumba$$ is gone in three years, she couldn’t held out that long?
TX, emails are mass-produced and completely disredgarded by politicians. A hand-writted letter is best, but anything computer generated or printed is tossed. Calling gives best bang/minute.
Unfortunately I have tried to email my congressman on several important seperation and first admendment issues but have not got a reply. I am not a US Citizen though so I don’t think I have the same bang as someone who can actually vote.
Dave,
We all know that you are an ego-maniac, but just because you went away for a week doesn’t mean the world started to crumble with the losing of Sandra Day O’Connor.
Although you pathetically try and make this blog revolve around you (instead of American Atheists), the rest of the world will be fine even when you go on holiday.
?Liberal? and ?Justice of the Supreme Court? do not belong in the same sentence if that sentence applies to the Court of the last 30 years. When William O. Douglas left the bench the last ?liberal? left. Clarence Thomas? progenitor Thurgood Marshall was a progressive ? but certainly not a ?liberal.?
An example: William O. Douglas refused to watch the porn films during the heyday of the Court?s post Fannie Hill repositioning. He said that he didn?t need to watch because he already knew that there was nothing in them that violated the 1st Amendment. ?Congress shall make no law?? meant exactly that to William O. Douglas.
Turning to the lovely ?50% of all laws? clich?, I?d like to point out that there is no process for removing out dated laws from the books. The only way to remove a law is for the legislature to expressly repeal the law. In nearly every state there are very old laws regarding rights-of-way for farm animals and regulations of the commons for grazing. There are antique laws governing everything from ice-cutting to miscegenation. The latter has been invalidated by a series of equal-protection and privacy rulings of the Supreme Court. Still, an invalid statute stays on the books unless removed by repeal.
Do we really want to pay for a legislature to review and rewrite antique laws where they might find a few old ideas that they can rewrite and use to play to the religious masses? Blue Laws anybody?
And now the shrub has put up Roberts for approval. A Catholic! Goodbye to Rowe v Wade. Maybe Congress will surprise us.
Maybe I’m being over optimistic here but maybe this is not such a bad thing. Church/State alliances in Europe have caused a rapid decline in religiosity. Even in formerly holy Ireland church attendance is below 50 percent.
Also, look at Iran where it is said that mosques are filled with old men and boys. The Islamic revolution has created a backlash against Islam from young people. Iran was a much more religious country when it was under the rule of the secular Shah.
In my view the religious right is setting in motion events that will lead to a major backlash against religion in the future. When the moderate majority sees their rights and freedoms being slowly but surely eroded by politicized religion there will be an inevitable backlash.
o’connor is no loss to real separation. she helped confuse people with flip flopping and lack of principled application of law. other enemies to liberty include breyer, ginsberg, rehnquist, scalia and thomas. ginsberg got a free pass from liberals when she refused to answer questions. will the demopublicans give roberts the same treatment?
prescriptipn diet pills
In your free time, check out some helpful info dedicated to meridian diet pill