Courts & Law

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (docket 12-536), a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court could open the door to even more money in politics than it did in its disastrous 2010 decision, Citizens United v FEC. If the court sides with the challengers in McCutcheon v FEC, political power and influence in America will further be concentrated in the hands of wealthy elite plutocrats.

Lyle Denniston at Scotusblog.com provides a brief summary, Campaign donation issue reopened:

Giving itself the option of changing its mind on government power to
limit campaign contributions, the Supreme Court on Tuesday set the stage
for review of the constitutionality of a specific donation ceiling set
by federal law, but a larger issue looms in the background. Since the
Court’s landmark opinion in 1976 in Buckley v. Valeo,
it has always given government more leeway to control contributions to
candidates or political organizations than over spending by candidates
or by independent political activists. That differing
constitutional treatment potentially is at stake in the new case, McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (docket 12-536).

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

On Wednesday, February 27, The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Shelby County v. Holder, a constitutional challenge to Section 5 preclearance under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (as amended). Andrew Cohen at The Atlantic has a beautifully written history of the Voting Rights Act and the case before the U.S. Supreme Court. After 50 Years, the Voting Rights Act's Biggest Threat: The Supreme Court (excerpts):

At 10 a.m. next Wednesday, the justices of the United States Supreme Court will hear oral argument in a case styled Shelby County v. Holder, one
of the most anticipated of the current Term. Agreeing to review an
argument made by an Alabama county that it ought finally to be free from
one of the key requirements of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the
justices will have an opportunity both to lead and to follow the nation
as it roils anew in political and legal battle over the rights of the
poor, the ill, the young, the car-less, the black, the Hispanic, and the
Native American to vote.

Nearing its 50th birthday, the act has become a part of our national lore. One of the crowning achievements of the civil rights movement (and of the Johnson Administration),
it was designed by its creators to finally give meaningful legal
remedies to minority citizens — blacks, mostly, but not exclusively —
who for generations had been precluded from voting (or from having their
votes fairly counted) by a dizzying flurry of discriminatory state
practices. The act didn't just expand the scope of existing federal
civil rights laws. It completely changed the dynamic between voters and
state and local governments. And the results are indisputable: There is
far less discrimination in voting today than there was half a century
ago — and many millions more minority voters.

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Joseph Ratzinger aka "Joey Rats," better known today as Pope Benedict XVI, announced that he is resigning from the Papacy on Monday. I didn't even know that was a possibility, I had to look it up. The last pope to resign was Gregory XII in 1415 as part of a political settlement to end the Western Schism when there were three claimants to the throne: the Roman Pope Gregory XII, Avignon Antipope Benedict XIII, and Pisan Antipope John XXIII.

Canon law does not specify any particular individual or body or people to whom the pope must manifest his resignation (Judy Blume's book title immediately popped to mind: "Are you there God? It's me, Margaret" — I quit), but Pope Celestine V in 1294 issued a solemn decree declaring it permissible for a pope to resign, and then he immediately resigned — "I'm outta here!"  Since Celestine's decree was never revoked, he set a precedent for a valid papal resignation. Who knew? They didn't teach us Vatican palace intrigue in my Catholic catechism classes.

"Joey Rats" was the Vatican enforcer for Pope John Paul II — who is no saint — before ascending to the throne himself. He was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly known as  the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition (yes, that Inquisition). It was his job to cover-up the numerous pedophile priest sex crimes and to reassign these priests to enable them to avoid criminal prosecution. "Joey Rats" had compassion for the sinner priests, but apparently not so much for their innocent victims. (I went to Catholic school with some of these victims).

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

A little more than a week after Senate Democrats decided not to weaken the filibuster,
Republicans are vowing to filibuster President Barack Obama's nominee
to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unless its powers are substantially
reduced. So how's that filibuster deal working out for you, Harry Reid? GOP to Filibuster Obama's Consumer Watchdog Pick:

The CFPB was created as part of the 2010 financial regulation bill
specifically to prevent financial institutions from engaging in the kind
of exploitative practices that helped lead the country to the brink of
economic collapse in 2008. Since January 2012, when Obama appointed
former Ohio attorney general Richard Cordray to head the bureau, it
has done exactly that—reigning in unscrupulous mortgage lenders, credit card companies, and debt servicers.

But the CFPB has only been able to do those things because Obama, using
what's called a recess appointment, installed Cordray in his post while
most of Congress was on vacation—an attempt to bypass Senate
Republicans' efforts to block the nomination. Before Cordray was picked
and blocked, Republicans had vowed to filibuster Elizabeth
Warren, who came up with the idea for the bureau and helped found it,
too. That didn't go as well as they had hoped: Warren recently returned
to the chamber as the new Democratic Senator from Massachusetts.