IS THIS A GREAT SUPREME COURT OR WHAT?
No more "delayed Miranda warning" confession-extraction tactics. (5-4 vote)
Internet pornography is ok (Ashcroft v. ACLU, case no. 03-0218)! (5-4 vote)
Just wondering how many Ashcroft vs. ACLU cases are pending?
posted by Anonymous at 5:02 PM
2 Comments:
The ACLU has been restraining itself mightily in the wake of 9/11. Why? After Bush v. Gore, the federal courts are so fantastically right-wing that any federal litigation at all carries the strong risk of making terrible, democracy and freedom-ending law. Thus the cases have been very few (relative to the past) and selected with a great deal of care. And thank god. If there had been a rush of federal constitutional rights litigation immediately after 9/11 without time for the Supremes to come to some semblance of distance and sense, America would be seriously, seriously fucked. I can say with no self interest that the intelligence and political skill of the ACLU national offices genuinely amazes me. There really isn't a comparable organization, in terms of effectiveness, cojones, and intelligent and disinterested application of fundamental principles.
There was a tremendous victory for constitutional rights in the sodomy case that tossed out anti-sodomy laws based on privacy. It was the last part that gave us some hope - the court had not recognized privacy that clearly since Roe, and in this climate, it was a tremendous prop to legal protections for privacy, which every brainless, power mad neo-con argues does not exist.
Jasper: Are they talking about the bordello?
Abe: No! The burlesque house. So just keep your mouth shut.
-The Simpsons
Post a Comment
<< Home