March 19, 2009
Any Texas student who had hoped to get out of the one-minute silence exercise suffered a defeat on St. Patrick’s Day. A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sustained a Texas federal court’s ruling that the state-mandated moment of silence is legal.
Edith Brown Clement wrote the decision for the panel, in Croft vs. Texas (the link is to a .pdf of the decision).
David and Shannon Croft, as parents and next friends of their three minor children (collectively, the “Crofts”), bring suit against the governor of the state of Texas, Rick Perry (“Perry”), arguing that Texas Education Code § 25.082(d) is an unconstitutional establishment of religion. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Perry, holding that § 25.082(d) had a secular legislative purpose and was not an establishment of religion. For the following reasons, we affirm.
* * * * * *
Conclusion
The Crofts have standing to challenge the 2003 Amendments. But the Amendments are constitutional and satisfy all three prongs of the Lemon analysis. There is no excessive entanglement, and the primary effect of the Amendments is not to advance religion. The most difficult prong—for this and for moment of silence statutes generally—is legislative purpose. But our review of legislative history is deferential, and such deference leads to an adequate secular purpose in this case. While we cannot allow a “sham” legislative purpose, we should generally defer to the stated legislative intent. Here, that intent was to promote patriotism and allow for a moment of quiet contemplation. These are valid secular purposes, and are not outweighed by limited legislative history showing that some legislators may have been motivated by religion. Because the 2003 Amendments survive the Lemon test, they are not an unconstitutional establishment of religion, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED
We covered the original trial court decision here at the Bathtub.
Not much news coverage of the story, not so much as I would have thought (many Texas schools are on break this week). No firm word on whether the Crofts will appeal further. An Illinois case went the other way in January — enough conflict to get the Supreme Court involved? Difficult to say. The Illinois Legislature is working to undo the federal court decision, in Illinois.
Would it be a good case to cover in government? What do you think?
What should the students meditate on? A suggestion from the comments at the Dallas Morning News blogsite:
“May we please have a moment of science, for those poor souls that cannot understand evolution as God’s scientific method.”
Joseph Cassles
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
3 Comments | 
Bill of Rights, First Amendment, History, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, Religion, School prayer, Separation of church and state, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Bill of Rights, Court Decision, History, Law, Moment of Silence, School prayer, Separation of church and state, U.S. Constitution | 
Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
March 16, 2009
Col. James Madison of the Virginia Militia, Citizen Soldier – National Guard image
James Madison was born on March 16, 1751 — date depending on which calendar you use.
Madison was one of our nation’s top two legislating presidents, on a par with Lyndon Johnson. The essential ally for the creation of America, he is known as the Father of the Constitution for his work to shepherd that compact into existence. A great ally of George Mason, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James Monroe, and sometimes nemesis of some of these men, Madison campaigned for freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of the press his entire life.
Madison was delegate to the Virginia assembly, and wrote freedom of religion into the Virginia Bill of Rights. He wrote the Memorial and Remonstrance defending religious freedom and opposing re-establishment of religion in Virgina, led the assembly to pass instead Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, helped settle the dispute over fishing and navigation in the Chesapeake, between Virginia and Maryland. In league with George Washington, he convinced the Continental Congress to try to fix the Articles of Confederation with a convention in Philadelphia in 1787, then he hijacked the convention to write a new charter instead. He wrote most of the Federalist Papers, with Alexander Hamilton, after John Jay was attacked and beaten by a mob. He campaigned and won a seat in the First Congress, defeating the popular James Monroe who then became his fast friend. Madison proposed and was chief sponsor of the 12 amendments to the Constitution that we now know as the Bill of Rights — two of the amendments did not win approval in 1791, but one of those did win approval in 1992 — so Madison wrote the first ten and the twenty-seventh amendments to the Constitution.
Electratig has a fine commentary on Madison and his birthday here, explaining the calendar shenanigans.
Go read the First Amendment, read a newspaper, and watch some news; say a prayer, and thank the stars and God for James Madison.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
2 Comments | Bill of Rights, Heroes, History, James Madison, Presidents, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Bill of Rights, History, James Madison, Presidents, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
March 15, 2009
The photos don’t show the beauty, nor do they capture the wonderful quiet that accompanied it.
It snowed briefly and lightly at George Washington’s home at Mount Vernon Friday morning.
Snow at the Quarters, Mount Vernon, Virginia, March 13, 2009 - copyright Ed Darrell
Al fresco dining would have been cool, and wet.
Snow on tables, The Quarters, Mount Vernon, Virginia - copyright 2009 by Ed Darrell
Inside, a few minutes later, the conversation was hot. We opened with a session the night before, and post-dinner meeting with William B. Allen, the editor of a recent collection of George Washington’s papers. Allen is suave, with a perfectly-modulated baritone voice. He doesn’t just speak in properly punctuated, grammatically correct paragraphs. He speaks in chapters that summarize volumes.
Among other telling gems, Allen noted that Washington, who is often regarded as an intellectual inferior to Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Hamilton and others, because he “wrote so little,” has had his collected published papers now pass the 100 volume mark. Reading the letters in full, as we did much of at this meeting, reveals Gen. Washington as little else can.
You should read yourself some Washington.
Tip of the old scrub brush, again, to the Bill of Rights Institute and Liberty Fund, sponsors and organizers of this event.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | George Washington, History, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Bill of Rights Institute, George Washington, History, Liberty Fund, Mount Vernon, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
February 26, 2009
Cross posted from Mr. Darrell’s Wayback Machine, with permission, with minor edits.
Everybody needs to have a copy of the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution close at hand.
Original rough draft of the Declaration of Independence written out in longhand by Thomas Jefferson, featuring “emendations” by Benjamin Franklin and John Adams – Library of Congress Manuscripts Division
Too often I’ve been in classes where textbooks didn’t have them, though in some cases the course clearly required it (especially irritating in high school texts, but not unheard of in college texts). The two documents are covered in depth in the requirements for Texas 10th grade social studies (world history), but not in the texts.
Both documents provide a foundation for analysis of events following, through the 19th and 20th centuries.
Where is the student of world history to find them?
Here:
Declaration of Independence
Constitution of the United States of America
Rotunda of the National Archives in Washington, D.C., where the Declaration and Constitution are kept on display – National Archives photo
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
2 Comments | 100 Milestone Documents of U.S. History, 1776, 1787, Bill of Rights, DBQ sources, Declaration of Independence, Government, Historic documents, History, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
February 2, 2009
Four young men turned a page of history on February 1, 1960, at a lunch counter in a Woolworth’s store in Greensboro, North Carolina.
Ezell A. Blair, Jr. (now Jibreel Khazan), Franklin E. McCain, Joseph A. McNeil, and David L. Richmond, sat down at the counter to order lunch. Because they were African Americans, they were refused service. Patiently, they stayed in their seats, awaiting justice.
On July 25, nearly six months later, Woolworth’s agreed to desegregate the lunch counter.
From the Smithsonian Institution: "Ezell A. Blair, Jr. (now Jibreel Khazan), Franklin E. McCain, Joseph A. McNeil, and David L. Richmond leave the Woolworth store after the first sit-in on February 1, 1960. (Courtesy of Greensboro News and Record)"
News of the “sit-in” demonstration spread. Others joined in the non-violent protests from time to time, 28 students the second day, 300 the third day, and some days up to 1,000. The protests spread geographically, too, to 15 cities in 9 states.
Smithsonian Institution: "On the second day of the Greensboro sit-in, Joseph A. McNeil and Franklin E. McCain are joined by William Smith and Clarence Henderson at the Woolworth lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina. (Courtesy of Greensboro News and Record)"
Part of the old lunch counter was salvaged, and today is on display at the Smithsonian Institution’s Museum of American History. The museum display was the site of celebratory parties during the week of the inauguration as president of Barack Obama.
Part of the lunchcounter from the Woolworth's store in Greensboro, North Carolina, is now displayed at the Smithsonian's Museum of American History, in Washington, D.C.
Notes and resources:
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
3 Comments | Bill of Rights, Brown v. Board, Civil Rights, Heroes, History, History images, History museums, Human Rights, Nonviolent protest, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Civil Rights, February 1, Greensboro NC, Heroes, Lunchcounter, Nonviolence, Sit-in | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
January 29, 2009
Oops, missed this anniversary date!
First page of patent granted to Thomas Edison on January 27, 1880 -- for light bulb
Thomas Alva Edison got a patent for “electric-lamp” on January 27, 1880.
According to the Our Documents site:
In 1878 the creation of a practical long-burning electric light had eluded scientists for decades. With dreams of lighting up entire cites, Edison lined up financial backing, assembled a group of brilliant scientists and technicians, and applied his genius to the challenge of creating an effective and affordable electric lamp. With unflagging determination, Edison and his team tried out thousands of theories, convinced that every failure brought them one step closer to success. On January 27, 1880, Edison received the historic patent embodying the principles of his incandescent lamp that paved the way for the universal domestic use of electric light.
(Information excerpted from American Originals by Stacey Bredhoff; [Seattle and London; The University of Washington Press, 2001] p. 62–63.
Our Documents grew out of the National Archives list of 100 milestone documents important to American history — Edison’s patent application was voted one of the top 100. Our Documents is now a joint exercise combining the efforts of the National Archives, National History Day, and USA Freedom Corps.
Page from Edison's application for patent for an "electric lamp" - National Archives
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
10 Comments | 100 Milestone Documents of U.S. History, DBQ sources, Government, Historic documents, History, History images, Invention, Technology, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: 100 Mileston Documents of U.S. History, 1880, Historic documents, History, Light Bulb, Patents, Technology, Thomas Edison | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
January 28, 2009
No, Obama didn’t change his mind. He’s changing the way government does business — putting government on a more solidly-based, business-like model for performance, according to at least one observer. That’s the shift discussed.
And it’s about time, I say.
Max Stier’s commentary on the Fed Page of the Washington Post quickly lays out the case that Obama’s making big changes. Copy it for students in your government classes (or history classes, if you’re studying the presidency in any depth). Stier wrote:
There are some fundamental reasons why our federal government’s operational health has been allowed to steadily deteriorate. It’s hard to change what you don’t measure, and our government operates in an environment with very few meaningful and useful measurements for performance. Perhaps more significantly, it is run by short-term political leadership that has little incentive to focus on long-term issues.
A typical presidential appointee stays in government for roughly two years and is rewarded for crisis management and scoring policy wins. These individuals are highly unlikely to spend significant energy on management issues, when the benefits of such an investment won’t be seen until after they are long gone.
(According to the Post, “Max Stier is president and CEO of Partnership for Public Service, a group that seeks to revitalize the federal government.” I don’t know of him otherwise.)
Political appointees can be good, but too many have not been over the past 25 years. A bad enough political appointee can frustrate even the most adept, dedicated-to-the-people’s-business career federal service employees, and frustrate the law and good management of agencies.
Let’s wish them all good luck.
Potential questions to follow-up this article in discussions:
- Constitution: Under the Constitution, who specifically is charged with managing the federal agencies, the “federal bureaucracy? What is that charge, in the Constitution?
- Constitution, politics: What is the role of Congress in managing the federal bureaucracy?
- Evaluating information sources: Do some research on the internet. Is Max Stier a credible source of information on managing federal agencies? Why, or why not? Who provides an opposing view to Stier’s? Are they credible? Why or why not?
- Evaluating information sources: Is the Fed Page of the Washington Post a good source of information about the federal bureaucracy? (Students may want to investigate columnists and features at this site; the Fed Page was started as a one-page feature of the newspaper in the early 1980s, covering for the public issues that tended to slip through the cracks of other news coverage, but which were very important to the vast army of federal employees and federal policy wonks in Washington.) What other sources might be expected? What other sources are there? (Federal News Radio is another site that focuses on the functions of the federal agencies — Mike Causey started out writing the column on the bureaucracy in the Washington Post; this is an AM radio station dedicated to covering federal functions in the federal city. Other sources should include National Journal, and Congressional Quarterly, especially if you have those publications in your school library).
- History, maybe a compare and contrast question: How has the federal bureaucracy changed over time? Compare the size, scope and people employed by the federal government under the administrations of George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Ulysses Grant, James Garfield, William McKinley, Dwight Eisenhower, and Bill Clinton. What trends become clear? What major changes have occurred (civil service protection, for example)?
- Analysis: How does the transition process from one president to the next affect federal employees and the operation of government?
- Analysis: How does the transition of President Barack Obama compare with past transitions — especially that of President Franklin Roosevelt, who also faced a tough economic crisis, or Ronald Reagan, whose transition signalled a major shift in government emphasis and operation?
What other questions did your students find in this article? Comments are open.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Bell Ringers, Current History, Federalism, Government, History, Labor and unions, Lesson plans, Management, Organizational leadership, Politics, President Obama, Presidents, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Bell Ringers, Bureaucracy, Civics Classes, Education, Federal Government, Government Classes, President Obama, Transition | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
January 27, 2009
For you Austinites, or someone close enough to make this training:
The Bill of Rights Institute at the
Texas Law-Related Education Conference
February 6-7, 2009
Event Website
Date: February 6-7
Where:
Hilton Austin Airport 9515 Hotel Drive Austin, TX 78719
The Bill of Rights Institute is pleased and honored to be exhibiting and presenting at the 2009 Texas Law-Related Education conference on Friday and Saturday, February 6 & 7. We hope while you are attending the conference, you will stop by our booth in the exhibits area and see our wide range of materials and programs that can enrich as well as bring new excitement to your lessons. Also, on Friday at 10:00 AM, we will be presenting a session at the conference on Lincoln’s Leadership: Secession and Emancipation (with free lesson plans distributed at the end of the session!).
Have a terrific time at the conference and we hope to see you at our booth or our session!
Bill of Rights Institute
200 North Glebe RD
Suite 200
Arlington, Virginia 22203
703-894-1776
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Bill of Rights, Education, History, Lesson plans, Teaching, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Bill of Rights Institute, Constitution, Education, History, Lesson plans, teacher training | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
January 21, 2009
Teachers are public employees (most of us). Should we blog about education and teaching?
Interestingly, there is a good case to be made that public employees have more First Amendment protection than private employees (should teachers in KIPP, charter and parochial schools blog?).
Larry Solum at Legal Theory highlights Paul Secunda’s article:
Paul M. Secunda (Marquette University – Law School) has posted Blogging While (Publicly) Employed: Some First Amendment Implications (University of Louisville Law Review, Vol. 47, No. 4, 2009) on SSRN.
I’ll wager most teachers are not common users of SSRN, so let’s steal Solum’s posting of the abstract of the article, too:
While private-sector employees do not have First Amendment free speech protection for their blogging activities relating to the workplace, public employees may enjoy some measure of protection depending on the nature of their blogging activity. The essential difference between these types of employment stems from the presence of state action in the public employment context. Although a government employee does not have the same protection from governmental speech infringement as citizens do under the First Amendment, a long line of cases under Pickering v. Bd. of Education have established a modicum of protection, especially when the public employee blogging is off-duty and the blog post does not concern work-related matters.
Describing the legal protection for such public employee bloggers is an important project as many employers recently have ratcheted up their efforts to limit or ban employee blogging activities while blogging by employees simultaneously continues to expand. It should therefore not be surprising that the act of being fired for blogging about one’s employer has even led to a term being coined: “dooced.” So the specific question that this essay addresses is: do dooced employees have any First Amendment protection in the workplace? But the larger issue examined by implication, and the one addressed by this Symposium, is the continuing impact of technology on First Amendment free speech rights at the beginning of the 21st Century.
This contribution to the Symposium proceeds in three parts. It first examines the predicament of private-sector employees who choose to blog about their workplaces. The second section then lays out the potential First Amendment free speech implications for public employees who engage in the same types of activities. Finally, the third section briefly considers a potential future trend in this context from Kentucky involving government employers banning employee access to all blogs while at work.
I’ve been wondering where are the cases of student blogs dealing with serious First Amendment issues. I think we’re overdue for more litigation in that area.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
4 Comments | First Amendment, Free press, Free speech, U.S. Constitution, Weblogs | Tagged: blogging, First Amendment, Free speech, Public Employees, Teachers | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
January 14, 2009
One more time, I gotta say that the lesson plans from the Bill of Rights Institute on inauguration is top notch. I’ve shared it around our department, and several people are downloading it, planning to put the stuff to use. It’s a good, solid lesson plan, it looks like something that will engage students nicely, and it’s on a topic that could not possibly be more timely.
But the free download goes away tonight! Go get the thing NOW!
The Bill of Rights Institute includes these lesson plans as a no-cost download with Being an American: Exploring the Ideals that Unite Us, Second Edition. That book is cheap, too — just $19.95 — so you can pay a bit, and still get this great lesson plan, plus a whole bunch of other good stuff.
But I’m an even bigger cheapskate, and I want this stuff to be ready to use on January 21, when our kids start the next semester. The hours are ticking away.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Bill of Rights, Current History, Freedom - Political, Government, History, Lesson plans, President Obama, Presidents, U.S. Constitution | Tagged: Bill of Rights Institute, Government, History, Inauguration, President Obama, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
January 12, 2009
New lesson plans and other materials from the Bill of Rights Institute, on presidential inaugurations. Even better if you’re a cheapskate like me, you can download the inauguration lessons for free, but only on January 13 and 14, 2009.
Free-for a limited time only!
Bring the historic Presidential Inauguration of 2009 into your classroom! “Presidential Inauguration: History, Tradition, and the Constitution” helps your students learn more about Inauguration Day from constitutional, historical, and current perspectives.
Those of you who own Being an American: Exploring the Ideals that Unite Us, Second Edition can use your unique passwords to access the lesson at any time. If you do not own the curriculum, you can download the lesson for free for two days only: January 13-14, 2009. Download your lesson at www.BillofRightsInstitute.org/today!
To buy Being an American, Second Edition, which gives you a full week of lessons and access to all past and future Web-based materials, click here.
Best deal, especially for U.S. history, spend the $20 and buy the full set of plans.
Also, check out these 25 inauguration videos from the past, at HotChalk.
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Bill of Rights, Government, History images, History video sources, Lesson plans, Politics, Presidents, U.S. Constitution, Video and film | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
January 9, 2009
It’s one of those arcane and many argue archaic things the “founders” left us, but the electoral college’s process of electing the president of the U.S. rumbled to completion yesterday when Congress opened the ballots from the electors, and then certified that Barack Obama will be the next president of the U.S.
Preparations for the inauguration continue unabated.
But for those still clinging to their tinfoil hats, even as the deadline rapidly approaches to go to High Definition Television, January 9 and January 16 offer chances for the Supreme Court to overturn the election, by ruling Obama’s birth was invalid. Some, confusing the Supreme Court with Congress, urge a landslide of letters to the Court itself (“that’ll show ’em!”).
I’ve managed to get myself banned at that last website. I asked the author to make a case, to provide the evidence and arguments against Obama’s eligibility. Such an appearance of gravity and Newtonian physics scares the bejeebers out of these groups.
One of the most intrigueing questions now: What will the Bergites and Dononfrions do after inauguration? Are there enough of them that Pfizer is working on a treatment, or cure?
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
15 Comments | Barack Obama, Elections, Law, Paranoia, Politics, President Obama, Presidents, Rampant stupidity, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court | Tagged: Barack Obama, Birth Certificate, Citizenship, Election 2008, Natural Born Citizen, Supreme Court, Tinfoil Hats | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
December 26, 2008
Some weeks ago we visited six hurdles that the case against Barack Obama’s eligibility for the presidency would have to overcome to disqualify him.
All six hurdles still remain. No one has made any serious response to any of the six.
Above the West Entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court is engraved "Equal Justice Under Law"
But the Birth Certificate Obsessed (BCO) people go on and on.
Let me note that the six hurdles still stand — six reasons why the objections to Obama’s eligibility will fail:
- Obama has a U.S. passport (claims that he doesn’t have a passport were put to rest when it was revealed, in March 2008, that State Department workers had illegally accessed his passport records).
- Because we know Obama has a U.S. passport, we can be quite sure his draft status was verified before it was issued — which puts to bed any issue about his registering for the draft (which he wouldn’t have been required to do in any case until 1980 — draft registration had been suspended in 1973 until the Afghanistan/Soviet crisis).
- Obama’s a lawyer; the National Conference of Bar Examiners, or the Illinois Bar, would have checked on any problems that surfaced when verifying his fitness to practice law.
- Obama was a U.S. senator; as a matter of course, the FBI does a background check on every U.S. senator to verify they may view top secret material. Security clearances are absolutely necessary for members of the Intelligence Oversight Committee, the Foreign Relations Committee, and the Armed Services Committee. Obama was a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, chairing the subcommittee that deals with U.S. relations with NATO — a post that requires top secret clearances.
- Obama has been getting the full national security briefing every day that the president gets; CIA and Homeland Security would have to verify his top secret clearances, and then some. There is absolutely no indication that this top, top check was not carried out.
- Perhaps most important, Obama posted an image of his birth certificate on-line in June; experts who checked the actual document verify it is real, and therefore authoritative.
Each of these six circumstances creates a rebuttable presumption that Obama is a citizen, and a natural born citizen under the somewhat ambiguous requirements of Article II of the Constitution. In order to make a case that Obama is ineligible, contestants would need to make a strong showing, with clear evidence, to rebut the presumptions created by by these official actions.
Professional poker player Leo Donofrio has made no such evidentiary showing, anywhere, at any time. Nor has any other Obama critic presented any evidence to overcome any of these six presumptions.
Recently a poster named Carlyle complained that my previous post had been unknown to him. While I posted trackbacks to his post at Texas Darlin’, that blog censors my posts and trackbacks, and thereby deprived this BCO from knowing about the facts (indeed, trackbacks are automatic, since Texas Darlin’ is also a WordPress blog; the only way the trackbacks and comments don’t show up at TD’s blog is because she censors them). With some fury, Carlyle and others found that post from November 27 and complained I was unfair to them. However, none has presented any serious challenge to the six hurdles.
How can I be unfair when they won’t make a case?
Here, below the fold, is an example of the heated and off-target responses I’ve gotten. Of course, I offer comments as we go.
Read the rest of this entry »
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
23 Comments | Barack Obama, Citizenship, History, Hoaxes, Jurisprudence, Law, Natural Born, Politics, President Obama, Presidential Eligibility, Presidents, Rampant stupidity, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court, Voodoo history | Tagged: Birth Certificate, Citizenship, History, Law, Natural Born, Obama, Politics, President Obama, Presidential Eligibility, Rampant stupidity, Supreme Court, Voodoo history | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
December 7, 2008
Responsible media, generally called in denigrating styel “mainstream media” by many of our more nutty nut cases, have held off in commenting on the Supreme Court’s position on the case against Obama’s election discussed in conference last Friday, December 5.
Except the Baltimore Sun, which notes as the Bathtub did, that the appeal is likely to go no further.
We won’t know for sure until tomorrow.
Meanwhile, Eric Zorn at The Chicago Tribune says “enough already,” and calls for the conservative moonbats to give up the nasty, fruitless calumny. (Also see this Tribune story.)
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
Leave a Comment » | Barack Obama, Elections, Presidents, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court | Tagged: Birth Certificate, Constitution, Election 2008, Electoral College, Obama, Presidential Election, Supreme Court | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
December 6, 2008
Generally the orders coming out of Friday conferences at the Supreme Court issue the following Monday. So, for Obama critics and dedicated Obama haters, there is still some hope that the Supreme Court might answer part of their wildest dreams. But it doesn’t look good for them.
[Saturday night update: Donofrio’s blog acknowledges the orders don’t include his case. He’s holding out for Monday. Technically, he’s right — the orders usually would issue Monday. But if Friday’s orders issued from Friday’s conference, it doesn’t speak well of the chances that an age discrimination case took precedence over a case challenging the election still in process. We won’t know for sure, until Monday.]
[Monday morning update, December 8: It’s official. Donofrio’s case was not accepted for a hearing. As the Washington Post noted, there are other pending cases, but nothing likely to be acted on soon. I’ve noted in other posts, I think it unlikely any of the cases has a signficant chance of success.]
No order issued from the Supreme Court to further discuss the appeal of the dismissal of a New Jersey lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president. Instead, the Court granted certiorari to an accused terrorist to challenge President George W. Bush’s authority (which will fall to President Barack Obama, really), and the Court granted cert and an okay for an amicus brief on a labor case (age discrimination).
(writ of certiorari: [Law Latin “to be more fully informed”] An extraordinary writ issued by an appellate court, at its discretion, directing a lower court to deliver the record in the case for review. ♦ The U.S. Supreme Court uses certiorari to review most of the cases it decides to hear.) Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th ed. (Bryan Garner, ed.)
Assuming this listing to be accurate, the shotgun arguments against Obama’s eligibility appear to be dead issues. The electoral college balloting occurs on December 15 in 50 state capitals and the District of Columbia.
Short of a mass exodus of Obama electors in states where law does not bind them to vote as they pledged to vote, Obama’s selection by the electoral college appears to be fait accompli.
The Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog noted the lack of order in the case, late yesterday.
For thousands of people addicted to the tubes of the internet, this will pose interesting problems as to what they can whine about for the next several weeks.
Previous comments on the Bathtub:
Over the front door of the U.S. Supreme Court: “Equal Justice Under Law.” Wikipedia image by UpStateNYer
Spread the word; friends don't allow friends to repeat history.
11 Comments | Barack Obama, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Supreme Court | Tagged: Barack Obama, Berg, Birth Certificate, Donofrio, Justice, Law, Politics, Rampant Insanity, Supreme Court | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 