Archive for the Constitution Category

Marital Musings (December 22, 2014)

Posted in Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Constitution, Courts, Economics, Gold Standard, Kleptocracy, Movie Reference, Radio, Russia, Silver Standard, Society, Sports, Supreme Court on December 28, 2014 by e-commentary.org

. . .

H1        “So she said we had to set aside some time for a conversation.  I knew it would get bad.”

H2        “You don’t get to say anything.”

H1        “Except when spoken to.  So she said she had to confess that she was thinking about someone else while we were in medias res.  And she said that she was now happy to have gotten if off her chest.  I said that was fine.  She could be thinking about Mr. Magoo if it will get us through the night.  From my perspective, if I can handle the kitchen remodel, junior can get braces.  But it ended up not being fine.  I should have been upset.  She was upset that I was not upset.  I was beginning to get sort of upset that she was upset that I was not upset.”

H2        “Nothing about Gina Lollobrigida.”

H1        “She would have exercised the proviso ‘til death do us part’ and parted with me.”

. . .

H2        “She asked if I noticed that she had put on weight.  I had not noticed, so I told her that I had not noticed.  I am thinking that I get 100 points for candor and honesty and being a great guy and for being a little oblivious.  Maybe an MVP award and a hall pass.”

H1        “And she was upset that you were not upset.  And it was Katie bar the door with Katie showing you the door.”

H2        “I didn’t get a pass.  I told her that once she made the cut and was on the team, things like that did not really matter.”

H1        “And she parsed every phrase.”

H2        “‘Made the cut’ and ‘on the team’ are two separate concepts.  Saying that it is like two wrestlers who make weight and then each go off and have bacon cheeseburgers did not assuage her anxiety.”

. . .

H1        “We conversed with a counselor who opined about psychological affairs versus physical affairs and provided few insights to address our financial affairs.”

H2        “Do you think he was safe?”

H1        “She is sure that we only talk about sex.”

H2        “Safe by a mile.  Replay is clear.”

. . .

[See the latest sophistry from the Supreme Court that vitiates the Fourth Amendment.  http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-604_ec8f.pdf.  An illegal stop is an illegal stop and not a legal stop.]

[See the commentary at “Henrietta And Henry O, Two Young Lovers: The Contemporary Gift Of The Magi (December 27, 2010).”]

Bumper stickers of the week:

“Honey, would you rather I were making love to him using your name, or making love to you using his name?”  Annie Savoy, Bull Durham (1988)

Russian Exceptionalism > or = or < American Nationalism

The COMEX is instituting trading collars for the sale of gold and silver.  And the answer to Will Shortz’ “Sunday Puzzle” seeking the correct anagram for “Comex” is . . . “Fraud.”

Cell Phones: Supreme Court Celebrates “Terrorism-Free Month” With Unanimous Proclamation On Privacy (June 30, 2014)

Posted in Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Constitution, Supreme Court, Technology, Terrorism-Free Month - June on June 30, 2014 by e-commentary.org

. . .

L          “At core, the Supreme Court really confessed that all nine of them in fact have cell phones, too.”

M          “Thank goodness that the Founding Fathers anticipated the emergence of cell phones.  That seems to be what animated Scalia, Alito and Thomas.”

. . .

L          “If, pray tell, a cop detained a Justice of the Supreme Court, the computer check of the vehicle license plate or a quick review of his or her Supreme Court identification card would summon an immediate apology from the police for the delay and inconvenience.”

M          “A cop would see the Supreme Court parking sticker on the bumper and arrest his or her activities.”

L          “Supreme Court Justices are immune from prosecution.”

M          “Yet their kids have cell phones and may not be afforded the same immunity.”

. . .

L          “Roberts’ opinion is an insightful commentary on the ubiquity of the cell phone and its pervasiveness in our lives.  The ‘smarty pants phones’ are the repositories of our mind and soul.”

M          “The kids in particular are transfixed by these fixtures that could be affixed to them with pop rivets.”

. . .

M          “You could craft a novel using just cell phone records and, for good measure, credit and debit card statements.  Grocery receipts, book purchases and movie rentals are a telescope and microscope into one’s internal hard drive.  The reader would need to participate actively in reading between the lines, discerning the interstices and supplementing the silences, yet the effort would be rewarded.”

L          “I stumbled on my January, 2011 credit card statement and relived the previous month just reviewing line item entries.  Who, what, when, where and, with some imagination, why.”

M          “There are no secrets today.”

. . .

L          “The Court and public officials should error, if it is an error, on the side of privacy.”

M          “A warrant really is not much to ask.”

L          “Nine to nothing is something.”

. . .

Bumper stickers of the week:

Get a warrant, please.

Justice Roberts knows more about cell phone telephony than your honor student . . . or your dog.

June – Celebrate Terrorism-Free Month (June 2, 2014)

Posted in Awards / Incentives, Constitution, First Amendment, Journalism, Newspapers, Press/Media, Race, Sports, Terrorism, Voting on June 2, 2014 by e-commentary.org

. . .

1          “We need to celebrate one Terrorism-Free Month a year.  June is a fitting time.”

2          “And it is a short month.  If it does not work, we can go back to being terrorized 24/7/365 without missing a beating.”

1          “If a month is too much commitment, perhaps we could celebrate Terrorism-Free Day every leap year.  For old time’s sake”

2          “For old timers who remember a different time.  If we are always terrorized, we are always too crippled to think clearly and to act purposefully.”

1          “We are forced always to be afraid of our shadow, even in the dark.”

2          “Especially in the dark.”

. . .

1          During the hiatus from terror, the Fourth Amendment should be adopted in all the land.  And the Third Amendment that protects against quartering troops in one’s home should also quarantine the government from entering one’s home, taking one’s data and invading one’s privacy. 

. . .

1          “However, the fear and terror is deep and rational and debilitating.  Too many folks are afraid of losing a job and too many are afraid of never getting another one, too many are afraid of not receiving health care, too many are afraid of not having a pension, too many are afraid of losing the house, too many are afraid of the future.”

2          “Too many are afraid of the present in this age of induced fear and uncertainty.”

1          “With good reason.”

. . .

[A nod to the Tewaaraton recipients and the awards committee.  http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2014/05/30/317352946/brothers-who-have-shared-the-spotlight-now-share-an-historic-first.]

[The Supremes are still setting the political agenda.  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/us/james-risen-faces-jail-time-for-refusing-to-identify-a-confidential-source.html?hp&_r=0 and http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/us/politics/supreme-court-to-hear-challenge-to-alabama-redistricting.html.]

[Challenging economic serfdom in a Blue State city.  http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/us/seattle-approves-15-minimum-wage-setting-a-new-standard-for-big-cities.html?hp%5B/embed.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Happy Terrorism-Free Month

Terrorism is so overrated.

The only thing we have to fear is fear and a whole bunch of other uncertainties.

Bulk Collection Of Telephony Data. Again. (December 16, 2013)

Posted in Book Reference, Civil Rights/Civil Liberties, Constitution, Courts, Due Process, First Amendment, FISA, Journalism, Judicial Arrogance, Law, Newspapers, O'Bama, Politics, Press/Media, Privacy, Republican Federal Judge Syndrome on December 16, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

L1        “You never know what a Monday will bring.  A federal judge ruled that the NSA’s bulk collection of Americans’ telephony records likely violates the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

L2        “You did not hear the word ‘telephony’ in polite parlance two dozen years ago.  The courts must now address the interplay of law with technology far more sophisticated than a pair of soup cans and a string.”

L1        “Most federal judges were ‘Arts and Crafts’ majors in college who may understand Tennyson but really do not understand technology.  Listen to the techs who install IT systems in the state and federal courts.  Some of these judges are still looking for the rotary dial.”

L2        “The government’s reliance on a case from the prehistoric days of telephony – way back in 1979 – is proof positive that the issue must be addressed anew in light of the new technology today.”

L1        “They will need to refer more often to Newton’s Telecom Dictionary than to Black’s Law Dictionary.  That will be fun.”                  

. . .

L1        “Within a fortnight of the Democrats’ decision to require the Senate to ‘advise and consent’ and vote on O’Bama’s appointments to places such as the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, the decision will have consequences.  One or more of the new appointees could be assigned to the reviewing tribunal.  If there is en banc review of the three panel decision, there are now more Democrats than Republicans.”

L2        “But will the Democrats defer to their benefactor?  Is there another Republican appellate court judge who may be a fan of the Constitution rather than unchecked federal intrusion?  And we always have the five Supremes who will get to chime in.” 

L1        “Who just don’t get it.  They do not even want to admit that the NSA exists.”

. . .

L1        “Judge Leon (Bush II) overcame the always pernicious ‘Republican Federal Judge Syndrome’ that almost always plagues Republican appointees.  Yet the judge once again displays the occupational hazard of these imperial federal judges.  His opinion is snarky, arrogant, condescending, intemperate, and sloppy.  The screed deserves a B+ for intuiting basic truth, a C- for style and an F for arrogance.”

L2        “When you are going to be courageous, you must be flawless.”

L1        “There are more than a few good women and men who are concerned that collecting the metadata is constitutional and may prevent a great catastrophe.”

L2        “But in the final analysis, there is the Constitution.” 

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled USA PATRIOT ACT (April 4, 2005), Less Government Regulation Series: Google (Nov. 30, 2009), Boycott Facebook? (August 2, 2010), Brave 1984 Farm: The Best Of All Possible Worlds (March 19, 2012) and Hero or Traitor? (June 10, 2013) and I Spy, You Spy, They Spy (October 28, 2013).]

[See the “e-ssays” titled Judicial Activism: Rogue Republican Judges (January 28, 2013), The Paradox Of The Republican Federal Judge: Republican Federal Judge Syndrome (September 23, 2013) and Past Time: Exercising The “New Clear Option” (November 25, 2013).]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Free Edward Snowden

Pardon Edward Snowden

Bestow a Presidential Medal of Freedom on Edward Snowden

Quash the sub poena issued to James Risen

Free the Press

In a dozen plus years and without a debate or a vote, technology has deprived us of privacy.  With little debate and many hasty votes, Congress has deprived us of privacy at every opportunity.  We as a society should create a rebuttable presumption in favor of privacy even if it appears to sacrifice security.  Our personal insecurities are actually creating greater national insecurity. 

The People’s Amendment: The “Contract With America” (April 29, 2013)

Posted in Awards / Incentives, Balanced Budget Amendment, Coffee Party USA, Conflicts of Interest, Congress, Constitution, Immanentizing The Eschaton, Political Parties, Tea Party, Term Limits on April 29, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

X          “What do Republicans and Democrats agree on?”

Y          “Nothing.”

X          “What do Republicans and Democrats disagree on?”

Y          “Everything.”

. . .

X          “There you go.  The People’s Amendment:  ‘If a law applies to the people, it applies to Congress; if an exception or exemption applies to Congress, it excepts and exempts the people.’  One simple commutative rule enshrined in a constitutional amendment.  Genius is always obvious and simple.”

Y          “And the provision applies equally to Republicans and Democrats.”

X          “Indubitably.  Courts could easily interpret it without all the arrogant activism and ideological warfare that characterizes the courts today.  Every tax payer has standing to enforce the People’s Amendment in court.  Individual Congresspersons and Senators who vote for legislation that violates the PA are held personally liable for the attorney’s fees of the tax payer who succeeds in enforcing the PA and a small percentage of the public damages.  Each representative’s self-interest is enlisted to provide for and protect the public interest.”

. . .

Y          “While you are at it, add a simple term limits provision.  Six two-year terms in the House and two six-year terms in the Senate are balanced and fair.  The provision applies equally to Republicans and Democrats.”    

. . .

X / Y  “However, a balanced budget amendment is hollow and shallow.  Congress can balance the budget without a balanced budget amendment if Congress wants to balance the budget.  Congress can circumvent a balanced budget amendment if Congress wants to circumvent a balanced budget amendment.”

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled The “Contract with America”; The Congressional Reform Act of 2010 (March 29, 2010), Term Limits (May 14, 2007) and Bringing Balance To The Balanced Budget Amendment Debate (July 18, 2011).]

[For an argument that John McCain and Lindsey Graham should not be considered “enemy combatants,” see the “e-ssay” titled Republicans are Enemy Combatants? (May 10, 2010).]

Bumper stickers of the week:

A Democrat for The People’s Amendment

A Republican for The People’s Amendment

An Independent for The People’s Amendment

A Libertarian for The People’s Amendment

A Green for The People’s Amendment

A Tea Partier for The People’s Amendment

A Coffee Partier for The People’s Amendment

A Partier for The People’s Amendment

My honor student supports The People’s Amendment

My average student supports The People’s Amendment

My below average student opposes The People’s Amendment

My dog supports The People’s Amendment

A sniper for The People’s Amendment

An LBGT for The People’s Amendment

A mom for The People’s Amendment

A dad for The People’s Amendment

A viscountess for The People’s Amendment

A Fan of Fred (Hayek) for The People’s Amendment

A visiting adjunct professor at the Barack Hussein O’Bama II School of Government at the University of Chicago for The People’s Amendment

The Sea Change Is Now A Tsunami (March 11, 2013)

Posted in Constitution, Courts, Equal Protection, Gay Politics, Law, Society, Supreme Court on March 11, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

LS1      “An amicus brief is a ‘friend of the court’ brief filed by someone who is not a party to a case that provides information and argument that may or may not have been advanced by a party to the case.”

N1        “Sounds like a legal way to lobby a court constituted of legal lobbyists for private interests.”

LS1      “In effect.  Before the Supreme Court writes its opinion, it is interested in the opinions of the Owners and others.”

N1        “Who would have guessed.  First the housebroken Republicans came out of the cloak room.  Then the business community came out of the board room.”

LS1      “They realized that inequality is less economically efficient than equality.  Surreal that one can drive from one state in a state of marital bliss to another state and enter into a state of marital banishment.”

N1        “That is bad for business.”

LS1      “No bandwagon has been boarded by as many people in as short a period of time.  Everyone now wants to influence the bench to allow all adults to walk down the aisle.  The train is leaving the station.”

N1        “They say the Supreme Court does not pay attention to the weather, but the Justices do pay attention to the climate.”

LS1      “You don’t need a climatologist to see which way the wind blows.”

N1        “But you do need courage.” 

. . .

[See the “e-ssay” titled Fukushima Daiichied (March 12, 2012) on the anniversary.]

[See the “e-ssay” titled Less Government Regulation Series: Love and Marriage (May 19, 2008).]

[See the articles at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/02/business/businesses-refuse-to-arrive-late-on-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=0, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/business/companies-ask-justices-to-overturn-gay-marriage-ban.html?ref=business, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/us/politics/gay-marriage-brief-gets-more-republican-support.html?ref=business and http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/01/us/politics/administration-to-urge-justices-to-overturn-a-gay-marriage-ban.html?ref=business&_r=0.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

“Gay marriage?  Here’s the way I see it.  If I had to get married, then THOSE PEOPLE have to get married.  Fair is fair.”

My wife keeps complaining that I never listen to her . . .  or something like that.

Can someone file an “enemy of the court” brief?

Hate is overrated.

Judicial Activism: Rogue Republican Judges (January 28, 2013)

Posted in Congress, Constitution, Courts, Journalism, Judges, Law, Newspapers, Presidency on January 28, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

1          “I can’t say that I like it.”

2          “Me neither.  Smells bad.”

1          “Why is it that the first thing you recognize is that three Republican federal judges concocted the decision.”

2          “Because that is what Republican federal judges do.”

1          “Congress is dysfunctional and inoperative.  The President tries to do something rational consistent with limited Congressional action.  The Republican federal judges in the judicial branch step in and do their part to pummel and constrain the President and the executive branch.”

2          “Congress established the agencies and Congress authorized the funds and Congress appropriated the dollars and then a minority in Congress plays games to keep the President’s appointments from getting in the saddle to run the Congressionally-approved and authorized and appropriated agencies.”

1          “And undermine the actions of the agencies.”

2          “The Republican federal judges take up the ball and undercut the President and the operation of executive branch agencies by proclaiming that the President is playing games.”

1          “Sort of a new take on the old rope-a-dope one–two punch.  Not pretty.”

. . .

1/2       “Courts are increasingly illegitimate, partisan and dishonest.  The day may come when they may need to be disregarded.”

. . .  

2/1       “Journalists typically note the political party and state of a legislator at the first mention of her or his name in an article.  ‘Congressman Billy Bob Jenkins (R-Uranus).’  Articles about court decisions may refer to the politician who appointed the judge in the last few sentences and thus the insight is often among the first sentences to be edited.  In the interests of full disclosure and recognizing that space is always at a premium, articles should note the President who appointed a federal judge in parens at the first reference to a judge or justice.  ‘Chief Justice John Roberts (Bush II)’.”  

. . .

[See the editorial at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/opinion/a-court-upholds-republican-chicanery.html?hpwand and the article linked in the piece.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

There is no law; there is only ideology.

Don’t believe anything until it has been officially denied.

Guns. Again. (December 17, 2012)

Posted in Constitution, Guns, Law on December 17, 2012 by e-commentary.org

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled The “Gun Show Loophole” (February 6, 2012), On Magazines (February 21, 2011) and One Gun Per White Adult Male? A Flintlock Musket? The “One Man, One Gun” Decision (October 4, 2010) and the dozen other related “e-ssays” posted in the “Guns” Category.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

We regulate dogs, diapers, fireworks, automobiles, . . .

When a psycho shoots up a gun show, should Americans show any interest in sound gun restrictions?   

Constitutional Remedies With An Expiration Date? Affirmative Action and Marriage Neutrality. Again. (December 10, 2012)

Posted in Constitution, Courts, Crime/Punishment, Gay Politics, Judges, Law, Less Government Regulation Series, Miscegenation, Society, Supreme Court on December 17, 2012 by e-commentary.org

. . .

A          “By my simple way of thinking, a constitutional right is either a constitutional right or it is not a constitutional right.  So you say that we treat everyone equally by not treating everyone equally for twenty-five years starting in 2003.  And then the unequal treatment in the name of equal treatment expires in 2028.”

B          “Yup.”

A          “The handiwork of Justice O’Connor.”

B          “Yup.  Not very tidy but workable.” 

A          “But when it comes to marriage neutrality, there is no public incubation period.”

B          “Nope.”

A          “In twenty-five years, no one will even pause when two guys or two gals get married.  But then there is the countervailing contention that society needs to change at its own pace and the law should follow.  Yet you maintain that the Supremes should simply state that it is the law of the land now.”

B          “Yup.  Because it is the law of the land.”

A          “And one person is now elected to make that decision in and for America.  Our friend Tony Kennedy.  The guy who could have been Bork.”

B          “Yup.  Another rich White boy who is a byproduct of one of the two most profitable law schools and an adherent of one of the two most powerful religions.  The youngster who always crayoned within the lines and then as a teenager completely penciled in the designated oval with a number 2 lead pencil is assigned to pen a decision that impacts the lives and the liberties and the pursuit of happiness of millions.”

A          “At the end of the day, the answer is simple.  You need to review the Protest Poem – The Declaration of Independence – quill penned before the Owners Manual – the Constitution.  ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.’”

B          “Yup.  That will work.”

A          “And reference the Equal Protection provisions of the Constitution for good measure.”

B          “Yup.  Absent attacks such as 12/7 and 9/11 that trigger a sea change in public opinion, no public consensus has emerged as rapidly in American history.”

A          “If the vote at the Conference is 5 – 4 in favor of marriage neutrality, Kennedy will write the defining opinion of his career.”

B          “Yup.  The minority will write the Plessy v. Ferguson decision for this century.”        

A          “Some guys get all the luck.”

B          “Yup.  They are reactionary guys.  You have got to give it to them.  The polite description is to note that they are off the wall.”

A          “If Roberts sees the writing on the wall, however, he may switch to the majority and opt to write the opinion himself.”

B          “Maybe.  Roberts took some history courses in college and is shrewd enough to foresee Clio’s ultimate verdict.”

A          “By my simple way of thinking, a constitutional right is either a constitutional right or it is not a constitutional right.  Marriage neutrality is a right.”

B          “What is gestating will be revealing.” 

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled The Conservative Solution To Affirmative Action (October 15, 2012), The Supreme Court – Unrepresentative and Illegitimate: The 33.3 Percent Solution (October 1, 2012) and September 17 – Constitution Day (September 19, 2011) and the “e-ssay” titled “Strict Construction” Strictly Construed (March 14, 2005) discussing Loving v. Virginia (1967) where the Supreme Court in an unanimous opinion affirmed the right to marry as a fundamental constitutional freedom.]

Bumper stickers of the week:

Marriage – the fundamental Constitutional right of every person to be miserable

Marriage = one consenting adult and one consenting adult

Marriage Neutrality – the government stays out of the picture and away from the altar

“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.  As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times.  We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

Thomas Jefferson (engraved on the Jefferson Memorial)

Women: 2; Men: 3; Boys: 4 – A winning combination

The Conservative Solution To Affirmative Action (October 15, 2012)

Posted in Affirmative Action, Constitution, Courts, Race, Schooling, South, Supreme Court on October 15, 2012 by e-commentary.org

. . .

CL1      “So the Supremes are going after affirmative action again.”

CL2      “Hostile Rich White Boys are not the most neutral arbitrators of opportunity.”

CL1      “In the American selection process, their kids can get into any college and law school just by calling up and then showing up.  ‘Justice Jerry’s son here.  See ya’ in September.’”

CL2      “The dispute comes down to the one last spot between the White kid from an unconnected family who does not otherwise appear to be a profitable prospect for the academic institution versus a Black kid who may be 43 SAT points short yet has attained in the face of limited opportunity.”

CL1      “Too many Americans refuse to acknowledge the impact of slavery and the Great Hundred Year War Of Terror in America from 1865 to 1965.  The epicenter was in the South but touched all of America with lasting effects today.”

CL2      “In 2003, Justice O’Connor and friends suggested an awkward but workable solution that is working awkwardly but solubly.  And gave it twenty-five years.  A shelf life on an exception to address what hopefully was an exceptional time in our history that was not exceptional.”

CL1      “Between you and me, I understand the anxiety spawned when the country’s highest court interprets the country’s most important document to allow for a remedy such as affirmative action which is at odds with the very right that is at issue.”

CL2      “Business, academia and other institutions have accommodated to the awkward modus vivendi without too much fuss in the last nine years.”

CL1      “The Supreme Rich White Boys, a gang that includes Thomas, have no business messing with precedent, tradition and settled practice.”

. . .

Bumper sticker of the week:

“White is right, Brown can stay around, but Black better get back.”  United States Supreme Court, June, 2013