On May 21, 2003, the United States Ninth Court of Appeals issued another one of the bizarre rulings for which it has become notorious. This time, the court reversed the conviction of an armed California bank robber, Deshon Rene Odom, because he “never intentionally displayed the gun.”

Odom pulled the robbery with an accomplice, both of whom were arrested outside the bank carrying loaded revolvers. The ruling, written by recently confirmed Bush appointee Judge Richard R. Clifton of Hawaii, inquired, “Can a bank robber with a concealed gun who never mentions or insinuates having one, but who displays it inadvertently, be convicted of armed bank robbery? We believe the answer is no….”

This kind of circuitous logic is emblematic of the Ninth Circuit Court.

The decisions of the Ninth Circuit Court are the most reversed in the federals appeals court system. In 1997, 27 of the circuit’s 28 rulings appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court were reversed, two-thirds of those by a unanimous vote. The court is the domicile of some of the most activist liberal jurists in America, such as Judge Stephen Reinhardt. Reinhardt, who considers an active judiciary to be the bulwark against despotism, is a paragon of liberal activism. He is the personification of the judge who would be king, and this disposition has manifest itself in the court’s rulings.

In another patently anti-Constitutional ruling about legalizing marijuana, the Ninth Circuit ruled that, for all practical purposes, California state law trumped U.S. law. The issue involved the California law about using marijuana for medicinal purposes. This is contrary to the Constitution of the United States, which declares federal law supersedes state law. This is a fundamental tenet of the Constitution, yet it somehow escaped the Ninth Circuit judges.

The Ninth Circuit Court is the same court that declared that the word “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional. Judge Reinhardt joined Judge Alfred Goodwin in that ruling. A court where God is unconstitutional is a court that is not concerned with interpreting the Constitution but rewriting it.

An even more recent example is the Ninth’s verdict in Doe v. Tenet, in which the court ruled that a pair of ex-spies could sue the Central Intelligence Agency. This is, of course, contrary to legal precedent established by the Supreme Court in Totten v. United States, in which the High Court forbade suits that " would inevitably lead to the disclosure of matters which the law itself regards as confidential." In his dissenting opinion, Judge Richard Tallman noted that the Ninth Circuit should be guided by legal precedent, "There has been no change in the law of spy contracts since Totten was decided in 1875. The secret existence of the espionage relationship and a claim for greater compensation was not justiciable then; it is not justiciable now."

Conservative judges were kept out of the judiciary during the Clinton years, and the liberals used the judiciary to circumvent the will of the people, foisting their agenda upon the nation via the bench. The immediate effect of judicial activism was in the criminal courts. Lenient sentencing of repeat offenders led to crime waves and thousands of innocent victims. However, now the civil courts are revealing the effects of judicial activism, as well. The spate of ludicrous malpractice lawsuits against doctors and hospitals has deleteriously affected the healthcare system. Lawsuits against gun manufacturers and fast food chains set a dangerous precedent that men no longer bear responsibility for their own actions, and this is entirely compatible with the jurisprudence of the Ninth Circuit Court. This is the irony: For all the judges on the Ninth who profess to believe the judiciary is the bulwark against despotism, they instead form an unelected legislature. Judges like Reinhardt, Goodwin, and Clifton do a disservice to the citizens of this country with their innovative interpretations. Thomas Jefferson, among many others, felt that the judiciary was potentially the most dangerous branch of the government because of their ability to veto the other two branches.

As judicial filibusters continue in the Senate – and with the specter of two or three impending Supreme Court vacancies – some wish to bring this kind of judicial activism to the national level. Senators Leahy, Schumer and Daschle have insisted the White House consult with them before appointing Supreme Court nominees. Now, more than ever, President Bush needs our support for conservative judicial appointments. America needs more judges like Antonin Scalia on the high court, not Stephen Reinhardt or Richard Clifton.

They're the laughing stock of the USA! If it weren't for the fact that these idiots are putting killers back on the streets, I'd not be able to control my guffawing...

Hippy-homos that don't know their fathers.

"They're the laughing stock of the USA! "

Unsubstantiated Allegation

America needs more judges like Antonin Scalia on the high court, not Stephen Reinhardt or Richard Clifton.



Or Karl Rove, or Herman Goebbles, or Bligh, or Khan, or ....

You can always tell right-wing spammers by the fact that they never use URLs to provide quick attribution to the articles they copy and paste. It's as if they try to make people think someone took the time to actually write something here, fresh.

Sure......

It's one thing to post right-wing drivel, but quite another to do it in a way that isn't professional, with attribution. It's as if they have something to hide, spammers that they are.

A few months ago, a graphic about the David Horowitz organization appeared on LA IMC. The above article came from his "Frontpage" outfit.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8509

It's worth posting that graphic again, as it's 100% on-point and highly revealing about the Orwellian revision of Horowitz's bio and public persona. He's just another nut-case leftist Stalinist that turned into a rabid neocon without a second rabies shot

here's the graphic:

Those 9th circuit judges are right sometimes! Just look at that "under God" catch phrase that they suceeded in having removed from the Pledge of allegiance!

He's got your liberal panties in a bunch!

He makes MY panties wet.

Don't change the subject to panties. (w)horowitz wraps himself in causes he would fight against tooth and nail today.

Double-speak.

Period.

I have nothing against conservatives. But neocon assholes? Sorry, while I'm not a liberal or 100% of anything, I don't like people that talk out of one side of their mouth and act in different ways

most people know there's a difference between traditional conservatives and the freaks known as "neo-cons" that are so powerful today. But in the event that that isn't clear to some that might read the above, I'd suggest looking at this:

http://www.fpif.org/papers/02men/box2.html

which comes from this:

http://www.fpif.org/papers/02men/index.html

"In what looked like a mini dress rehearsal for the cacophony of dissent that's expected to hit the streets of New York City during next summer's GOP convention, nearly 3,000 demonstrators gathered on Seventh Avenue to protest President Bush as he presided over a $2,000-a-plate fundraiser inside midtown's Sheraton Hotel on Monday," the Village Voice reports:

The folks on the street seemed to have little trouble connecting the issues. Antiwar placards demanding "Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction?" and "End King Geoge's Reign of Terror!" jostled freely with pro-choice banners and signs denouncing Bush's "War on Women." Many in the crowd said they were outraged that the Republican party continues to invoke the attacks of 9/11 as a rallying cry for Bush's presidency. "I feel like Bush coming to New York is especially hypocritical because he's done nothing for this city," said Sarah Beretczki, a 29-year-old illustrator from Brooklyn who sported a sign that read, "My Bush Sheds Its Own Blood."

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0326/ferguson.php

I saw some of these people riding the subway Monday night, and it makes us understand why the Republican Party chose New York as the site of its convention. No one pays much attention to protests of a mere fund-raiser, but during the convention TV crews will be unable to resist them--thus treating voters across the country to images of Bush's opposition as a bunch of extremists and freaks.

upster and up

Does anybody have any photos of engorged donkey dicks that I could masturbate to?