#1 Reason Why We Need a Democratic President!! SCOTUS APPOINTMENTS!!!

[Pisces]

If nothing else moves you, this SCOTUS decision has got to make you understand how important the next appointments to the Supreme Court will be. We can not afford to have conservative appointments with the current makeup of the court.

I fully support the President but for those who don't this should make you reconsider your opposition.

[SidDithers]

1. K&R...nt

Sid

[FLyellowdog]

2. Exactly!!!!!!!!!!!

[MannyGoldstein]

3. I think we all agree with you

We may disagree on how to do it.

[WhoIsNumberNone]

4. SCOTUS decision = 9-0

While I agree with your assertion, today it didn't mean shit.

[Pisces]

6. THat's not true, they never release how the votes went.

[Webster Green]

11. Huh?

That is not true.

[Ruby the Liberal]

13. Tell that to the bevy of media sources reporting a unanimous decision

with no dissent.

That said, they were ruling on whether to hear his case (the stay was to give that time to be scheduled), not on the merits of the state-sponsored murder happening tonight.

[Pisces]

15. I just read about it. I had heard on Ed that they did not have word.

[Fearless]

40. They ALWAYS release who voted which way...

One justice additionally writes the majority opinion... a piece on why they came to the decision they did, explaining it legally. And one on the dissenting side also offers an opinion of why the dissenters disagree.

This is true of EVERY Supreme Court case.

[Honeycombe8]

44. I don't think so.

I may be wrong, but what you are talking about is a regular court decision that the Court has considered. In that case, it's no secret how the Justices voted. It's a matter of record.

But in some criminal cases, like a Writ of Habeus Corpus or something, a criminal case makes a request just for something to be considered, and the USCT decides, up or down, yay or nay. In that case, votes are not counted. The case wasn't heard or decided on. The S.Ct. just decided NOT to hear the case.

But I don't know exactly what was filed with the Supreme Court. The article I read didn't say. It also didn't say what the Court had decided.

[Ruby the Liberal]

60. 2 page brief from each side.

Davis' laywers asked the SCOUTS to consider hearing an appeal. GA lawyers argued that all stones have been overturned, and from a legal perspective, there is nothing left to review.

They weren't deciding on the murder of Troy, only a temp stay while an appeal was being scheduled.

[trashcanistanista]

12. Yes,

it was unanimous. Shameful.

[gateley]

5. There was no dissent, meaning OUR people were in agreement.

There seems to be some different criteria for SCOTUS when it comes to this issue (it was alluded to on Ed), so that may be the explanation. It still makes me mad and breaks my heart.

But we need a Dem Prez for SCOTUS appointments nonetheless.

[BzaDem]

10. No noted dissent does not mean no dissent. We will never know what the vote was.

[WhoIsNumberNone]

16. Just tweeted by the Nation:

"Now conflicting reports that full court was not allowed to decide Troy Davis case."

Will be waiting on further details

[Webster Green]

7. They just said on KPFA that the decision was unanimous.

I wonder if all the justices were involved.

[Ruby the Liberal]

8. The decision tonight was unanimous - not 1 dissent.

They are all cut out of the same damn cloth. Corporations = citizens, no problem. Citizen convicted on phantom evidence = fry the bastard.

Fuck the officials in Georgia, fuck the SCOTUS and fuck the administration from not stepping in ala Kennedy.

[Firebrand Gary]

29. I refuse to believe this. Please provide a link to support your statement.

[Ruby the Liberal]

37. Look it up yourself.

I am watching MSNBC on the TV and DemocracyNow on livestream, both reporting unanimous. My twitter feed is blowing up with CBS, Reuters and AP references to unanimous.

I choose not to waste my time because you are not following the story tonight. You can either google it yourself (as it is breaking news) or wait until tomorrow and read all about it.

[Firebrand Gary]

45. Typical, you are posting all this negative propaganda and you can't even support it.

I am watch the same channels that you are and there is NO documentation showing what you are trying to state.

[Ruby the Liberal]

51. Well, if you are watching tv for "documentation" that may be your first problem.

unless you are some kind of insider at Apple and your TV spits out paper.

[Ruby the Liberal]

52. How about you prove all of us wrong (that you are baiting with your laziness)?

Provide links stating that the decision was NOT unanimous.

I'll be right here waiting.

[kelly1mm]

9. Um ........ there were no dissents, meaning President Obama's appointments

did not vote to stay either.

[BzaDem]

14. You have no idea if that is true. They often do not release the vote count. They just say "denied."

Sometimes, they do, and sometimes they write separate opinions. But in most cases they never release the vote count.

[Puglover]

17. Yeah his last two appointments did great here.

Get a goddamned grip.

[Pisces]

18. "Get a goddamned grip?" WTF is wrong with you. Conservative court means conservative rulings. This

is one example.

[Puglover]

28. Lets see.

How can I make this within the insane rules of this website.

How did his two appointees rule? No dissent.


YIPPPEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!! :bounce:

I seriously feel sorry for your disconnect.

[Firebrand Gary]

33. Please show your evidence.

[Puglover]

35. Unanimous

"Fully in agreement."

[Firebrand Gary]

36. Fully means 5

[Pisces]

55. crickets from the peanut gallery.

[Puglover]

57. The most pressing question I have as I read your pathetic OP is

how on earth did you escape from my ignore list? Buh bye!

[Pisces]

61. Some good news today.

[Horse with no Name]

19. Yep. We are soundly fucked.

There is really no hope.

[Webster Green]

34. Yep. There really is no hope.

[Ruby the Liberal]

22. But corporations are citizens!

Can't pick our battles, I guess.

:grr:

[Firebrand Gary]

20. Democrats need to fall inline behind President Obama.

This is what is at stake.

May Democratic Underground now part like the red sea. I hope Progressives now rally behind our President and stop letting these lurking Tea Party/Republican infiltrators cause mischief and turn us against each other.

In the name of Troy Davis we must stop the bickering and unify for a single purpose, to stand together and fight to stop any further Republican Supreme Court appointees.

[Ruby the Liberal]

24. And where were his nominees 'in the name of Troy Davis'?

Too busy courting the corporation/citizens during their downtime?

[Firebrand Gary]

38. You want to offer that evidence?

And don't give me that "Fully in agreement" Crap. Fully means 5

[Bluenorthwest]

27. The President did not say a word for Davis and his appointments

said kill him, it took them all of 4 hours to tie the noose. So, exploit on another day.

[Pisces]

56. Maybe you should get the facts before you start your attacks.

[NaturalHigh]

48. You are right! Dissent cannot be allowed!

In fact it should be outlawed!

Note: I'm hoping I don't actually need to post the sarcasm thing.

[MadHound]

21. Umm, it was a unanimous decision.

Yeah, Obama's appointees joined in on this travesty of justice.

[Firebrand Gary]

41. How about a link to support your statement?

[lonestarnot]

23. SCOTUS = The real death panel.

[Ruby the Liberal]

26. THIS

[lonestarnot]

47. All kinds of excuses are being made for them, like it was all sewn up, their hands were tied yata

yata. What bullshit. This country's justice system is just bullshit. Afraid to admit a mistake will cause people to lose confidence in the justice system, but I guess killing innocent people makes for more confidence? How fucked up is that?

[Firebrand Gary]

42. That I can agree with.

[NaturalHigh]

25. Yeah, great occasion to be campaigning. Pretty tasteless.

You do realize that the two Obama appointees joined in the unanimous decision, don't you?

[Puglover]

31. They are shameless.

SHAMELESS. I gotta take a break from these freaks.

PS Putting this one on ignore. Along with the one demanding "proof" I cannot stand the filth that they peddle.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. Tacky and apparenlty not very accurate post.

nt

[OhioChick]

32. Unanimous Decision

[Firebrand Gary]

39. Proof?

[OhioChick]

43. Here's one....

CBS News correspondent Jan Crawford reports there were no dissenting opinions on the court in denying Davis' request.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/21/national/main20109778.shtml

On Edit to Add:

Democracy Now! is reporting that the Supreme Court has refused to stay the execution of Troy Davis. They also report that there were no dissents on this decision.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/163561/supreme-court-rejects-stay-execution-troy-davis

[BzaDem]

46. Yes, there were no dissenting opinions. That does NOT mean there were no dissenting votes at all.

There are plenty of stays denied or accepted without any noted dissents, even though we can infer several months later that there were indeed dissenting votes. We will never know.

[Firebrand Gary]

49. Your article says nothing about the break down of the SCOTUS decision.

[Firebrand Gary]

50. There is NO SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION that verifies the specific breakdown of the decision.

[taught_me_patience]

53. There was no way this appeal was going to work

Even if there were 9 Ginsburgs on the court. It's really not the supreme court's jurisdiction.

[PurityOfEssence]

54. Yes, that is the point.

I am disgusted with Barack Obama, although the last week has brought forth a couple of acts to his credit, especially taking a stand on taxing the rich.

I was disgusted with him in the fall of '06 when he actively courted the religious zealots, and even moreso when whipping up a cultural, racial and religious frenzy to defeat Hillary in South Carolina in the fall of '07. The cynicism of his ultramoderate corporatism and the childishness of his appeasement of thugs just grinds salt into the wound. He is dragging the country to the right, and then leaving it vulnerable for the reactionaries to take the reins and do even worse. Currying favor at every instance he is undercutting the environment and labor, and waging a shockingly illegal war, while expanding and sustaining our other misadventures.

Still, we need to win. As I sit here in middle age, probably the most significant atavistic disaster to have befallen us is the Citizens United ruling, an example of judicial legislation that far outstrips anything the sanctimonious conservatives have continually railed against.

We need to hold the court. It's bad enough as it is, but it could be much, much worse.

[Ruby the Liberal]

59. I fail to see how.

(Re - much much worse).

What progressive decision (hell, any decision favored by the left) has this court made since 2009?

[Pab Sungenis]

58. But let's have the right appointments.

The last two moved the court further to the right.

If the next one to go is Scalia or Thomas then I don't care if another "moderate" is nominated, but if Ginsburg or Breyer go next, it better DAMN well be an actual liberal.

[Puregonzo1188]

62. I've followed this case for awhile and I remember when Sotomayer was up for nomination

Amy Goodman had a segment on what it might mean for the Troy Davis case, based on her past rulings on criminal justice, innocence claims, and the death penalty.

It wasn't good. And there weren't any dissents.

I don't blame Obama for this, not by any stretch of the imagination, but I also don't think it gives the kind of support to his reelection you think it does. Our entire system failed in a way that is bigger than any President.