Tag Antonin Scalia | VenusPlusX

Scalia’s Cry for Help: Impeach Me!

The most recent insanity expressed by United States Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia:

…[T]he separation of church and state “doesn’t mean the government cannot favor religion over non-religion.”

…[S]ecularists concern over the overreach of religion into the government and every aspect of the public sphere is “utterly absurd” …

…[T]he Constitution’s only obligation is to protect Christian’s [sic] freedom of religion and was never intended to protect Americans from religious imposition.

Antonin Scalia
Photo by Stephen Masker
Flickr/creative commons

The only pronouncement from Scalia that could be considered rational: I’m guilty of sedition. I am guilty of putting my religious fundamentalism ahead of all reason and justice. Impeach me, please!

Like an errant child, he is begging for our discipline, and we should oblige him by redoubling existing efforts to impeach him once and for all. There are other offenders of his ilk on the Court but he is by far the worst.

It is so very sad to see the psychological ravages of religious fundamentalism so sharply on display, especially by a person with immense power. Taken to its extreme, American religiosity erodes the very brains wherein it resides. Patient Zero is Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a very, very sad case, indeed.

Scalia’s religiosity and his powerful position on the Court aren’t centered on anything good, nothing greater than his/the radical right-wing agenda aimed at obliterating any progress since the 17th century, even since the Dark Ages, when religious hierarchies controlled every aspect of human life. His views parallel Sharia Law in practically every respect.

Scalia’s extreme religiosity has distorted his thinking so much that he is no longer capable of rational thought, or his job in interpreting the United States Constitution. The shreds left of his humanity have become devoted to openly pursuing his objective of making religion, specifically his distorted view of catholicism, the law of our land. Several Court decisions over the last few years reflect this in-bred malignancy, even as he continues his campaign to make religion supreme, in our schools, for corporations, and in government. Pundits rightly label him a Vatican surrogate.

In the last 100 years, progressives (both religious and not) have succeeded in demanding equal protections and rights guaranteed in the Constitution, including such things as the civil rights of minorities and a woman’s right to exercise her own healthcare decisions. Scalia and his minions’ reactionary behavior and actions against these inevitable gains are militant in their expression, totalitarian by any measure.

Progressives are not “shoving their disbelief down our throats,” as Scalia and others contend. This favorite screed of the radical right wing is just a fear reaction from those who have never accepted, and will never accept, the intended idea of the separation of church and state, that each person has the right to their own (personal) religious freedom, an unassailable human right that protects all of us with freedom from religion.

We often forget to remind ourselves that the puritans who left England were basically banished to the The New World because of their religious extremism, and their philosophical progeny has been at work to destroy our Constitution practically from the start. It’s an uphill battle to contain this extremism, to call it out for what it is, and we must continue to wrest freedom from the jaws of radical religiosity.

As ordinary citizens we have the power. Find out what you can do today to end the reign of freedom’s fiercest enemies, starting by calling for Scalia’s impeachment.

Scalia must go. United States Supreme Court Justices can be impeached for sedition and intentional distortion of our founding Constitution. Please sign this petition, and campaign among your family and friends to help end the scourge of religious fundamentalism, here and abroad.

#####

When Free Speech Becomes Sedition

Chelsea Nesvig’s
Ripe for A Caption
Flicker/creative commons

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal:
People are ready for a hostile takeover
of Washington, D.C.,
warns of a coming rebellion.

Yeah, he really said that, hostile takeover, and I think he was speaking not only to those present (1000 evangelical leaders) but to all the trigger-happy militias and tea party folks who would savor the opportunity to do just that.

Jindal’s remarks foment unrest and civil war in America even though it would result in nothing less than a fundamentalist theocracy, one just as bad as the Sharia Law they rant against.

As Jindal sees it, religious freedom and the American Dream are being threatened. Someone over the age of 8 should be able to see just who is making threats in this situation, however.

There’s more and more online traffic, and Facebook and Twitter chatter, about the implosion of right-wing extremists, something that seems more inevitable with each passing month.

In a recent set of op-eds, including, Right-wingnuts Bless Progressives, and When Will We Move to Impeach Certain Supreme Court Justices (Part 1 and Part 2), I’ve been speaking out because these miscreants are so mean, so hateful, so exclusionary, but most of all SO SCARED of change anywhere, including in their own lives and behaviors. And, because they are so emotionally troubled and childish in their logic, their pronouncements are simplistic and without a future in the real world. They cause some pain, but there is no there there, no future. But, as I cautioned last week . . .

Make no mistake, these right-wingnuts, all of whom are white christianists with only a handful of exceptions, are just as misguided and murderous as any fundamentalist theocrat you can find in all the world’s trouble spots. And, just like them, right-wingnut politicians have fueled domestic terrorism.

The chief sponsors of this theocratic oligarchy are very sad, and so desperate to make their negative points that they now talk like we can’t see or hear them, resulting in a surreal effect. Lately it seems like one goes down a day, self-destroying their own legacy, self-creating permanent stains on their careers, what they will be most remembered for.

George Will damning campus sexual assault victims for obtaining a coveted status is relatively benign compared to the seditious comments and speeches of people like Jindal and Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia whose words and conduct direct the overthrow of the state and the democratic process.

Jindal and Scalia are just two of these known threats to democracy, individuals that can be prosecuted under the current laws. If left to their own devices, they and their cohorts will spark a civil war. But what can we do out it? If we don’t know, we better dig deeper.

Limits on free speech are few and far between in an open society like ours, and finding someone guilty of the crime of sedition has faded from use over the last century. But are we ever to draw the line? I think I know where that line of criminal sedition is: Whenever a public servant with authority, or even a celebrity with lots of Twitter followers, uses their conduct or speech to incite people to rebel against the state (especially the U.S., which dominated by duly elected public officials), they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Domestic terrorism is a growing threat, according to the Department of Homeland Security, and these right-wingnuts are making the case for it. They must be stopped. Jindal can be voted out office and Scalia can be impeached but that won’t shut them up unless they are formally prosecuted.

We want to know what you think, so please comment here or on Facebook/Venusplusx, or write to us directly, columbia@venusplusx.

Bobby Jindal Says Rebellion Brewing in Washington

When will we move to impeach certain Supreme Court justices? Part 1 and Part 2

Right-wingnuts Bless Progressives

Budowsky: History to Impeach Roberts

Sign petitions to impeach John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas.

And, to learn why VenusPlusX thinks this is important, read A Manifesto for The New Age of Sexual Freedom, and catch our unique mix of posts and videos 24/7 that will get us all to our better future, sooner rather than later.

in Campaigns / Grassroots / Key Issues / News of Note / Op-Ed / Public Information / Uncategorized by Alison Gardner 23 Jun 2014 0 comments

When will we move to impeach certain Supreme Court justices? (Part 2)

Flickr/creative commons

“In the Potemkin justice of the Roberts
court, the right to vote is under attack,
while the power to buy elections
is sanctified by law. Corporations
are called people under a faux doctrine
of free speech, while women are denied
standing to combat discrimination.”
– Brent Budowsky Editorial from The Hill, April 9, 2014.

Most of us came of age with nearly blind trust in this once-austere body, this third branch of government charged with deciding the most challenging questions of our time. But times have changed, and so has the purpose and direction of the Supreme Court. It’s literally gone off the rails, insane.

So, yesterday, we formally joined the national conversation by asking when the grassroots-at-large will rise up, start paying more attention to this judicial menace, and act by using the formidable power vested in the people to reshape The Supreme Court?

Budowsky’s April 9 editorial offers a prescription for us, a place to start in the near term:

Democrats, liberals and populists should promote a constitutional amendment to reverse Supreme Court decisions, propose statewide ballot initiatives to take back America from special interests, and make corruption in Washington a defining issue to mobilize the Democratic base, rally political independents and transform the 2014 and 2016 elections.

It’s one thing to make corruption in Washington a defining issue, but what of the larger picture? Which body reigns above us all and makes possible the Koch Brothers and their spawn? stands with the National Rifle Association in its total misunderstanding of the Second Amendment? restricts voting among known Democrats wherever and whenever possible? The list of shame goes on and on.

We have seen the rise of something worse than winning or losing a couple of elections. Pre-eminent constitutional law scholar Laurence Tribe calls it the “Roberts Anti-court Court,” not just for the Court’s dismal showing, especially in the last several years with it’s rash of constitution-shredding decisions in favor of monied, self-interested litigants, but for it’s dramatic restructuring of the procedures and rules they formerly operated within, delimiting class actions, and forcing involuntary binding arbitration.

Tribe’s must-read book is entitled, Uncertain Justice: The Roberts Court and the Constitution.

“Since 2005, the Roberts Court has issued a string of decisions that make it harder to hold the government accountable in court when it violates the Constitution.”

“The result is a shrinking judicial role in enforcing the Constitution and protecting our liberty.”

[The Roberts Court is] “far more sensitive to the substantial burdens of litigation than to the potential benefits of lawsuits.”

“Whereas the midcentury court saw itself as a protector of the powerless, the Roberts Court is mostly uninterested in that role . . . it has dealt critical legal rules a death of a thousand cuts—leaving many of our rights intact but making them effectively impossible to enforce in any court”

Tribe urges us to “seek justice elsewhere . . . the democratic process, social movements, arbitration, our communities and families, consumer report websites and other means of ensuring that everyone comply with the law. Indeed, the Constitution presumes that democracy, not litigation, is how we’re supposed to resolve many disputes.”

Arthur Bryant, Chairman of Public Justice, a national public interest law firm, writing Thursday for the National Law Journal, agreed with Tribe’s analysis but goes a step further, “We must keep fighting for justice in the courts” and “keep working hard to make the Supreme Court a pro-court court. We need courts to provide access to justice to all.”

First, we need to keep using the courts, as much and as best we can, to hold corporations, the government and the powerful accountable—exposing the truth, righting wrongs and making the wrongdoers pay.

Second, we need to keep fighting to preserve and expand access to justice. Nothing could be more important.

The bottom line is that we cannot accept an anti-court Supreme Court. We need to develop a pro-court court. Then we need to do what everyone in America should be able to do: Go to court and get justice.

You can learn more about some of the more egregious recent decisions by the Court by taking a look at Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, unconscionably awarding people’s free speech to corporations who have exploited this new right only further consolidate corporate and political power; Shelby County v. Holder, a gutting of the Voting Rights Act of 1965; and, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, legalizing political graft.

Educate yourself for this inescapable campaign to unseat the worse of the worse as it revs up into full gear. Sign the petitions against Chief Justice John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas. And, connect with organizations and people in your own community who want to step forward to rescue America from these misguided justices. We need really, really wise justices to protect the voiceless, and these three are not that.

Click here for yesterday’s Part 1.

For more:

Budowsky: History to Impeach Roberts

We Cannot Let and “Anti-court Court Eliminate Access to Justice

Uncertain Justice: The Roberts Court and the Constitution

And, to learn why VenusPlusX thinks this is important, read A Manifesto for The New Age of Sexual Freedom, and catch our unique mix of posts and videos 24/7 that will get us all to that better future, sooner rather than later.

in Campaigns / Grassroots / Key Issues / News of Note / Op-Ed / Public Information / Uncategorized by Alison Gardner 21 Jun 2014 0 comments

When will we move to impeach certain Supreme Court justices? (Part 1)

“Five conservative Republican men serving on the Supreme Court,
led by a chief justice who has violated 200 years of judicial precedent,
despite pledging under oath during his confirmation hearings to respect
judicial precedent, are waging a legal war of mass destruction against
core principles of American democracy . . .”
— Brent Budowsky Editorial from The Hill, April 9, 2014.

Antonin Scalia
Flickr/creative commons

Every June, I get nervous about the Supreme Court, and the Roberts’s court in particular. My knees have been shaking at the very idea that they may rule anyway now to give Hobby Lobby and all corporations/employers’ the right to disallow contraception coverage, something that is mandated by and totally funded by for the Affordable Care Act of 2010.

When I was growing up in the 50s, my parents impressed upon me the reverence they paid to the Supreme Court, whose justices served selflessly for life to decide the hardest decisions American’s face. I held this view up until the retirement of Justice William J. Brennan in 1990. At the time, I was close friends with his daughter and happen to be privy to the fact that he stayed on longer than he wanted to boost the progressive voices then on the court. But a lot has changed since then. George Bush was elected in 2000 and proceeded to pack the court with conservative judicial activists instead of stalwarts of justice. So now, we find ourselves looking for grounds for impeachment starting with the two of the worse, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, along with their enabler, Chief Justice John Roberts.

This right-wing majority in the Supreme Court is now forcing us to endure the most terrible, constitution-shredding rulings I never could have imagined: In 2009, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission opened the floodgates by giving organizations free speech prerogatives, formerly reserved for individuals, in allowing political spending by outside groups, something that has since clearly hijacked the democratic political process. Then in 2013, the court decision in Shelby County v. Holder gutted, savaged really, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, striking down its Section 4 as unconstitutional, the formula that subjected certain jurisdictions (mostly in the South with its bad voter protection histories) to pre-clearance by the Department of Justice before implementing new changes in their voting laws and practices. And, also last June, in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, the Court held that aggregate campaign contribution limits were invalid under First Amendment, newly legalizing a long-ago rejected form of outright political graft.

There are already numerous petitions to call for the impeachment of Chief Justice John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas. Roberts has even prompted a petition from his own right wing, for siding with the progressive side of the court which upheld that people can be forced to get coverage under Affordable Care Act, just as with car insurance, a widely accepted premise.

Both Thomas and Scalia have been participated in partisan fundraising, which would be be considered a clear violation of ethics. Thomas’ wife, Ginni, was also on the payroll of at least one of these organizations, Thomas says he “forgot” to disclose. An analysis of Scalia’s public statements and speeches could hold the key to his ouster because they were seditious. Unfortunately, ethics censure is voluntary for Supreme Court justices. They are not held the same standard of conduct that all other federal judges are held to, and under which they can be impeached.

Budowsky urges us to mobilize:

Democrats, liberals and populists should promote a constitutional amendment to reverse Supreme Court decisions, propose statewide ballot initiatives to take back America from special interests, and make corruption in Washington a defining issue to mobilize the Democratic base, rally political independents and transform the 2014 and 2016 elections (from The Hill)

What will you do to address this most important threat to American democracy in our history?

This post continues in Part 2 with a discussion and analysis of Laurence Tribe‘s new book, Uncertain Justice: The Roberts Court and the Constitution.

For more:

Budowsky: History to Impeach Roberts

We Cannot Let and “Anti-court Court Eliminate Access to Justice

Uncertain Justice: The Roberts Court and the Constitution

in Campaigns / Grassroots / Key Issues / News of Note / Op-Ed / Public Information by Alison Gardner 20 Jun 2014 0 comments