Conservative Lawyers Voice Abundant Joy

[Khephra]

In an atmosphere of optimism, redemption and gleeful gossip - "So who's Bush going to put on the court first?" - nearly 1,000 conservative lawyers gathered here this week at the annual convention of the Federalist Society.

Analysts may debate whether President Bush's margin of victory on Nov. 2 constitutes a mandate, but to the members of the society, the election means the promised land is within sight. They are confident, they said, that Mr. Bush's second term will give them what they have yearned for before, only to be disappointed at partial fulfillment.

In the intermissions between the esoteric discussions of the convention's legal panels, several members said they hoped that a commanding majority of seats on federal appeals courts would now be occupied by lawyers who shared their views.

Those views generally include opposition to affirmative action and abortion, support of stronger rights for property owners who complain that they are besieged by federal regulations, and insistence on greater respect for state powers relative to those of the federal government.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/13/politics/13federalist.html

[VivaKerry]

1. I wonder, when will the CONSERVATIVES, the real ones

either tell the radical right to stop using THEIR name in the pursuit of a nut-ball agenda OR start using a different moniker.

Conservative lawyers. My ass. I wish!!!

[Cronus Protagonist]

4. Just as soon as the Christians do the same.

ie. Never.

Show your support for the president, wear a FUCK BUSH button!

http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
(We usually ship same or next business day by first class mail)

[high density]

2. Yay, a brainstorming session on how to permanently damage America!

Sounds like fun!

[SoCalDem]

3. Mandate...Schmandate...

These people have no shame.. They are 99% hubris 1% contents unknown..

[DELUSIONAL]

5. Ah the Freddies -- this is one of the most dangerous groups

in the US. Founded by Scalia -- they flew under the radar for years.

Francis Boyle used to write about the Freddies -- at the time I wasn't quite sure what this U. of Illinois International Law Prof was writing about. His predictions about what the Freddies would do if they got any more power has come painfully true.

They want to rewrite the Constitution -- well just read anything by Scalia and that's what this idiots want.

A long time ago a misreading of a court decision gave life to Corporations -- and now Corporations have become more important than human beings.

My question to the legal eagle who know about the Freddies -- how do their goals fit with the Christian reconstructionist's goals? Scalia is Catholic and last I heard the Fundies don't approve of the Catholic church (Fundies believe that the Catholics practice idol worship etc).

[no_hypocrisy]

6. In a nutshell, this is the way Federalists interpret the Constiution:

Judges must take the position of the Framers when they interpret the Constitution. They may not take into account 200+ years of social and economic progress; it's irrelevant.

For instance, a rule is a rule, meaning limited if any exceptions. That would mean you are either guilty of murder or you're not. That would exclude the defenses of mercy killing, abortion, euthanasia, etc. The Founders didn't mention any of these situations when they drafted and ratified the Constitution, therefore they don't matter in a capital murder case.

Long story short: Federalist judges have to read the Constitution literally. The link to Christian fundamentalists here is it's like reading the Bible literally, without interpretation or opinion from it. No reading between the lines.

Read more from research on the internet.

[The Flaming Red Head]

7. Sounds like the Taliban interpreting the Koran.

Veils anyone?

[no_hypocrisy]

8. BINGO!

[Maccagirl]

9. Reagan's legacy

We'll be living with it for generations.

:cry:

[Komrade _azul]

10. Dude, where's my supreme court?

And we thought the economy was a dig issue.

[TahitiNut]

11. Intolerance for ambiguity in the legal profession is poisonous

These are regurgitationists. They're "push and puke" types, with atrophied reasoning abilities: binary brains in an analog Universe. Despite their specious posturing about 'strict construction' they slavishly osculate the gluteal maximi of Court Reichbots who gave us the Bush v. Gore abomination that's NOWHERE justified in the Constitution.