CARTOON


SCALIA IN HEAVEN 175547_600

Advertisements

CARTOON


2 bd160215-701x526

“Will Sri Srinivasan Replace Antonin Scalia? The D.C. Circuit Court Judge Has Been A Frontrunner For Some Time”


SRI SRINIVASAN

SRI SRINIVASAN

“Jon Stewart had no problem proving Antonin Scalia a dishonest hypocrite”


DAILY KOS

Antonin_Scalia_Jon_Stewart_2

SCALIA CARTOON #3


CARTOON 3

SCALIA CARTOON #2


CARTOON 2

SCALIA CARTOON #1


CARTOON 1

HOW COULD CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS FORGET THE LONG LINES IN 2012 ELECTION? OH, HE DOESN’T LIVE IN THE DEEP SOUTH :(


NBC NEWS

SCOTUS GUT VOTING RIGHTS ACT

“The law had applied to nine states — Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia — and to scores of counties and municipalities in other states, including Brooklyn, Manhattan and the Bronx.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote that Congress remained free to try to impose federal oversight on states where voting rights were at risk, but must do so based on contemporary data. But the chances that the current Congress could reach agreement on where federal oversight is required are small, most analysts say.

Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined the majority opinion. Justice Ginsburg was joined in dissent by Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R57dn5ZLQbc

More…

“Attorney Barry Scheck on taking DNA from suspected criminals”


NBC NEWS

By Collier Meyerson

On Monday, the Supreme Court handed down a controversial decision to uphold the sampling of some suspected criminals’ DNA, a practice at least 26 states have already implemented. In a 5-4 ruling, conservative Justice Antonin Scalia sided with the liberal justices and wrote the dissenting opinionciting indiscriminate search as a concern:

“Searching every lawfully stopped car…might turn up information about unsolved crimes the driver had committed, but no one would say that such a search was aimed at ‘identifying’ him, and no court would hold such a search lawful.”

The case has sparked a robust dialogue surrounding a suspected criminal’s right to privacy. The 4th Amendment of the Constitution states that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” Dissenters of the decision believe that without a warrant, DNA sampling breaches an individual’s rights to privacy.

On All In with Chris Hayes Monday, attorney Barry Scheck sided with Scalia’s emphasis on privacy rights for Americans. Scheck, founder of The Innocence Project, an organization that helps prisoners prove their innocence through DNA testing, explained after the show why he falls on the side of the Supreme Court. Considering Scheck’s life work in exonerating prisoners, what makes him disagree with this use of the practice? Check out the video to find out his answer.

More…

SCOTUS: Will Procreation Determine Prop 8?


More…