Thursday, October 06, 2005

The Post I Didn't Write

a/k/a Harriet Miers, SCOTUS, and the Little Turkey Baster Bill That Could

By now you've heard the good news that the Turkey Baster Bill has been dropped--at least in Indiana, in its current form, for the moment. In addition to being great political good news, the reprieve also gets me off the hook for writing the Supreme Court angle on this story. Only...I've collected some great resources while I was researching, so I'm presenting them here for you to enjoy, rather than just scratch my efforts.

Punkrockhockeymom was the first person I saw in the past two days to mention how the Turkey Baster Bill relates to the Supreme Court.

The short, and more generalized, version: whether or not Harriet Miers is approved, and regardless of *which* Bush nominee is ultimately approved, Republicans will shortly control the Supreme Court, and will continue to do so for decades. In order to overturn previous Supreme Court decisions that they desparately hate, they need court challenges to consider. Deliberately introducting unconstituional bills like the Turkery Baster Bill at the State Legislature level, in Republican-controlled states where they can guaratee passage of the bill, is how to set up the public to bring cases before the Supreme Court that will provide a pretext to overturn those decisions. And at that point, "unconstitutional" is a function of who controls the Supreme Court, and how they (and their masters) have decided to interpret the constitution.



The following bills are all potentially up for challenge once we lose the Supreme Court.

Griswold v. Connecticut
http://frogsdong.blogspot.com/2005/10/right-to-privacy-where-eliminating-it.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut

Roe v Wade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

Lawrence v. Texas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas

Eisenstad v. Bair
Farkleberries on Eisenstad and Indiana
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenstadt_v._Baird



Contrast those decisions in support of a right to privacy, against these other, relatively recent, decision:

Buck v. Bell
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1134/is_6_111/ai_87854861
http://www.law.du.edu/russell/lh/alh/docs/buckvbell.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell

Skinner v. Oklahoma
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinner_v._Oklahoma
http://www.proteinwisdom.com/index.php/weblog/entry/19133/#106422



Related Reading


What Republicans Mean by "Legislating From The Bench"

The Federalist Papers


Remember that, in terms of political strategy, Republicans play chess while Democrats play checkers.

Now, if you'd read all of those informative links, you'll know a whole lot about what is at stake right now with the Supreme court nominees, and you'll be able to better understand how many moves in advance Republicans are planning when they introduce "unconstitutional" (sic) bills.

And, if you would be kind enough to imagine I wrote all kinds of words weaving those links together to make a compelling and persuasive post, then I'd be most obliged.


The Full Turkey Baster Bill Series

Part I Intro to the Bill
Part II Republican Strategy
Part III Bill Update
Part IV Supreme Court Resource Roundup
|

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home