Supreme Court May Be Most Conservativ...

Supreme Court May Be Most Conservative in Modern History

There are 13 comments on the FiveThirtyEight story from Mar 29, 2012, titled Supreme Court May Be Most Conservative in Modern History. In it, FiveThirtyEight reports that:

If President Obama's health care bill is stricken by the Supreme Court, liberals will take it as evidence of judicial overreach, or at least that the court has shifted far to the right.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at FiveThirtyEight.

maybe too late now

Toronto, Canada

#1 Mar 29, 2012
lolol

Santa Fe, NM

#2 Mar 29, 2012
you've got to be kidding !!!!! kagan sotomeyer ginsburg breyer are ultra-libs and even kennedy would be a long shot to call conservative. So, you must be talking about the Canadian supreme court, definitely not the US.
Joe_Sixpack

Plano, TX

#3 Mar 29, 2012
Upholding the constitution means to f"ar the the Right"?

When have the Supremes ever said a citizen MUST engage in commerce?

Evidently the court is only wrong when it disagrees with the left??
Halito

Winnemucca, NV

#5 Mar 29, 2012
Halito

Winnemucca, NV

#6 Mar 29, 2012
Lt Bradshaw

Omaha, NE

#7 Mar 30, 2012
Two of the nine are in the Koch brothers pockets. One of those is a mute who never speaks or asks a question. He Just votes the way he is paid to vote.
The court showed it's contempt for Americans very clearly in the Citizen's United ruling. I would not describe those Justices as "conservative". They are extremist, activist judges who seek to legislate from the bench in order to enrich their employers and solidify control over the wheels of power.
Scalia and Thomas should recuse themselves from every case that the Koch's have a lobbying interest in due to the obvious conflicts of interest. They should be sanctioned for not doing so.
Louiston

Omaha, NE

#8 Apr 4, 2012
Lt Bradshaw wrote:
Two of the nine are in the Koch brothers pockets. One of those is a mute who never speaks or asks a question. He Just votes the way he is paid to vote.
The court showed it's contempt for Americans very clearly in the Citizen's United ruling. I would not describe those Justices as "conservative". They are extremist, activist judges who seek to legislate from the bench in order to enrich their employers and solidify control over the wheels of power.
Scalia and Thomas should recuse themselves from every case that the Koch's have a lobbying interest in due to the obvious conflicts of interest. They should be sanctioned for not doing so.
Oh, so they should recuse but you're okay with Kagan's involvemnt. You're quite the stooge. Sotomayer & Ginsburg are Soros toadies.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#10 Jul 29, 2012
The rich people got bailed out and now want a tax cut because its the democrat's fault?

where is Ron Paul when you need him, bring our troops home!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#11 Jul 29, 2012
"Supporters of Ron Paul, including myself, will not support Romney or Obama. You don't understand the Revolution well enough if you think that we are going to settle for the President simply because he's less likely to engage in a war. And I wouldn't be too sure of that either. Obama is relentlessly killing people in the Middle East with his drones. He has threatened Iran, signed the NDAA, and even has a kill list. He is just as much of a destructive warmonger as Romney. Ron Paul's supporters want less war, less spending, and less government, and neither Obama and Romney will give us that"

I will support my democratic party but yes bring our troops home
sheepleloveroyal ty

Pottstown, PA

#12 Jun 3, 2013
This is a conservative supreme court-WTF

This court is about the status quo ie their status in their judicial system. Not the constitution or the law but their status and/or THEIR agenda.

Never ever forget that a supreme court justice is a POLITICAL appointee that means politicians must appoint and approve them. They must be politically savy before they are picked. Politics means deals and favors. Politics means closed door smoke filled room deal before and while on the court.

You don't think these political hacks calling themselves supreme court justices don't horse trade with their votes they way politicians do I'd think you would be mistaken.

Conservative or liberal which shouldn't matter on the supreme court. The constitution should matter. But this is what a political appointment spawns-personal political agendas and POLITICS-not justice.

I've always found it puzzling that so called conservatives are frequently very pro law enforcement to the point of constitutional violation. They can rationalize all the want but it's constitutional or not and all the pontification in the world shouldn't change that.

Todays ruling in favor of dna samples for all arrestees goes against a conservative personal freedoms less government point of view. AND the constitution. Which means this is a political ruling and not a ruling based on warrantless search what should be illegal search and seizure from your body. How they confused that with a replica or copy of a your finger print I don't know.

Their are neither conservatives or liberals on the supreme court. Politicians are on the supreme court.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#13 Jul 27, 2013
Chief Justice Roberts hands the Prez another major victory

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#14 Oct 5, 2013
swedenforever wrote:
"Supporters of Ron Paul, including myself, will not support Romney or Obama. You don't understand the Revolution well enough if you think that we are going to settle for the President simply because he's less likely to engage in a war. And I wouldn't be too sure of that either. Obama is relentlessly killing people in the Middle East with his drones. He has threatened Iran, signed the NDAA, and even has a kill list. He is just as much of a destructive warmonger as Romney. Ron Paul's supporters want less war, less spending, and less government, and neither Obama and Romney will give us that"
I will support my democratic party but yes bring our troops home
no comment
Cordwainer Trout

Lexington, KY

#15 Oct 5, 2013
Now that Sotomayer has effectively recused herself from many issues destined before the Court, it may be more Conservative. Little children can rest easier; it's less likely the Supremes will validate gays molesting youngsters and not having to register as the sexual predators every one of them is. Although, Ginsberg is still there, so either the problem continues, or the other Justices will have something to laugh about...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

John G. Roberts Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Supreme Court upholds Obamacare subsidies (Jun '15) Jul '17 UAW 48
News Continue reading Supreme Court rules for Missou... Jun '17 A Shame 3
News Neil Gorsuch to be confimed Friday after democr... (Apr '17) Apr '17 Churchlady 10
News Rights of learning-disabled students bolstered ... (Mar '17) Mar '17 anonymous 19
News What we learned about Neil Gorsuch during his S... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Court 1
News Part II: Atheists Fail Stripping "God" from Pre... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Karen Burton 1
News If a bullet can cross the border into Mexico, s... (Feb '17) Feb '17 ja ja ja 18
More from around the web