Two or three more Scalia's or Thomas's on the Supreme Court and

[Cyrano]

we can kiss our freedoms goodbye.

Not nearly enough attention has been paid during this campaign to who will get to select the next supreme court justices.

Given the troglodytes that Bush has selected for the federal district courts, is there any doubt in anyone's mind that he'd find more Scalia's and Thomas's to appoint to the supreme court.

Say goodbye to Roe v Wade, freedom of the press, the separation of church and state, any right to privacy, civil rights, worker's rights, patient's rights, Miranda warnings, the right to an attorney, and so much more. Sound crazy? SCALIA AND THOMAS HAVE ALREADY TOLD US WHERE THEY STAND ON THESE ISSUES.

If Bush wins/steals the upcoming election, we are sooooo fucked in so many ways.

[leftynyc]

1. Amen to your worries

The most important issue and the least talked about.

[Auntie Bush]

2. This is one of my biggest worries.

[pacalo]

3. Did you read this in today's NYTimes?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/18/opinion/18mon3.html?th

When the court struck down Texas' "Homosexual Conduct" law last year, holding that the police violated John Lawrence's right to liberty when they raided his home and arrested him for having sex there, Justices Scalia and Thomas sided with the police.

They were just as indifferent to the plight of "M.L.B.," a poor mother of two from Mississippi. When her parental rights were terminated, she wanted to appeal, but Mississippi would not let her because she could not afford a court fee of $2,352.36. The Supreme Court held that she had a constitutional right to appeal. But Justices Scalia and Thomas dissented, arguing that if M.L.B. didn't have the money, her children would have to be put up for adoption.

That sort of cruelty is a theme running through many Scalia-Thomas opinions. A Louisiana inmate sued after he was shackled and then punched and kicked by two prison guards while a supervisor looked on. The court ruled that the beating, which left the inmate with a swollen face, loosened teeth and a cracked dental plate, violated the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. But Justices Scalia and Thomas insisted that the Eighth Amendment was not violated by the "insignificant" harm the inmate suffered.

This year, the court heard the case of a man with a court appearance in rural Tennessee who was forced to either crawl out of his wheelchair and up to the second floor or be carried up by court officers he worried would drop him. The man crawled up once, but when he refused to do it again, he was arrested. The court ruled that Tennessee violated the Americans With Disabilities Act by not providing an accessible courtroom, but Justices Scalia and Thomas said it didn't have to.

[Cyrano]

4. Yep. Bob Herbert's column. Great piece. And scary as hell.