Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Supreme Court

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 17, 2012, 11:54 p.m. EST by Toynbee (656) from Savannah, GA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The former employees, friends and cronies of politicos who have formed Super-Pacs (Super Political Action Committees) aimed at supporting the very people these Super Pac people used to work with and/or know and socialize with have -- at least since the Citizens United decision -- made our U.S. Supreme Court a laughing stock and an embarrassment to the principles on which our Constitution was supposed to rest. God Bless America and our worthless Supreme Court.

3 Comments

3 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by ZenDog (20533) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

They have brought our entire system into complete discredit. Some here would argue that has been going on for a long time as seen with our foreign policy - but I think this is the final straw.

Say - what do you think of this?

There is a Vermont Attorney, James Leas, who argues against amending the Constitution to prohibit campaign finance contributions by corporations

He states that to say we need to amend the Constitution is to say there is something wrong with the Constitution, that to amend the Constitution is to provide the Court with even more text that they may then misinterpret, and he says:

  • "We do not need a 2/3 majority of Congress, we need a simple majority of Congress"

He relies on Article III Section 2 of the Constitution to point out that Congress:

  • In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the supreme court shall have original jurisdiction. In all other cases before mentioned, the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the congress shall make.

He depends entirely on with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the congress shall make to make his case that Congress does have the authority to regulate the influence of money on elections and has the authority to tell the Supreme Court to stuff it.

Is this an accurate read of Article III?

[-] 0 points by poltergist22 (159) 2 years ago

this is what we should do....www.nationalday911.org

[-] 2 points by Toynbee (656) from Savannah, GA 2 years ago
  • Interesting, but far too simplistic for the morass of problems wrought on this nation by big money, well-heeled, insiders, corporate elitists and others who either are or represent the 1%

  • OWS needs to press forward with vigor from every single corner of this nation.