June 29, 2004

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?

2 Comments:

Blogger JAB said...

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.

June 29, 2004 at 6:28 PM  
Blogger Undersecretary to the Deputy Commissariat said...

Jasper: Are they talking about the bordello?
Abe: No! The burlesque house. So just keep your mouth shut.

-The Simpsons

June 30, 2004 at 9:33 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home