Justice John Roberts is a judicial activist of the worst kind.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The Supreme Court has never, ever stuck down established precedent before *cough* Brown v. Board of Education

[Dinner]

No one argued that numbnut. Roberts claimed he was not an activist and that by and large he wanted to uphold the status quo. Clearly that isn't the case when it comes to campaign finance laws.

[Kuciwalker]

How is anyone's freedom of speech affected? Everyone still has the right to speak.

See the post after that one.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No one argued that numbnut. Roberts claimed he was not an activist and that by and large he wanted to uphold the status quo. Clearly that isn't the case when it comes to campaign finance laws.

Clearly you have never seen a SCOTUS confirmation hearing. Who was the last nominee who didn't say they had respect for precedent?

[Imran Siddiqui]

via wikipedia from Roberts' confirmation hearing:

Now, the Court, of course, has the obligation, and has been recognized since Marbury v. Madison, to assess the constitutionality of acts of Congress, and when those acts are challenged, it is the obligation of the Court to say what the law is. The determination of when deference to legislative policy judgments goes too far and becomes abdication of the judicial responsibility, and when scrutiny of those judgments goes too far on the part of the judges and becomes what I think is properly called judicial activism, that is certainly the central dilemma of having an unelected, as you describe it correctly, undemocratic judiciary in a democratic republic."

So he most assuredly not saying he was just going to follow precedent in every aspect. Stare decisis never demands that!

[Solomwi]

The supreme court has up held campaign finance laws nearly a dozen times in the last century and they've NEVER found it harms anyone's speech because money /= speech. It's pretty much as established as law can be but here comes activist John Roberts trying to pick an ideological bone redirecting everything so he can be an activist. I guess he lied at his confirmation hearing about respecting precedent.

[a.kitman]

dont see why it matters... look at usa 50 years back and now you will notice your loseing the grip. you all hate each other. no grip. no vision. a helpless carcass. your gona eat each other up

[Solomwi]

We've always hated each other. Believe it or not, it was actually much worse than this about 150 years ago.

[Kuciwalker]

We've always hated each other. Believe it or not, it was actually much worse than this about 150 years ago.

Yeah. The 1860s had something like 10-20x as many gun-related homicides per capita as we do today.

[Imran Siddiqui]

[Ben Kenobi]

Yeah. The 1860s had something like 10-20x as many gun-related homicides per capita as we do today.

You know, there might have been something to all that dueling.

[Solomwi]

Yeah. The 1860s had something like 10-20x as many gun-related homicides per capita as we do today.

And less drug trafficking to blame it on.

[chequita guevara]

Yeah. The 1860s had something like 10-20x as many gun-related homicides per capita as we do today.

[Guynemer]

Christ, I hate having Oerdin on my side.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Hey, on certain issues I have to deal with Ben being on my side, so you have to deal with Oerdin