SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

Re:  Garcetti v. Ceballos (04-473), Tue 30 May 2006.

  • Removes 1st Amendment rights from, and ensures the arbitrary punishment of, public employees who say or write anything offensive to government hierarchies in their official communications.
  •  Criminalizes dissent.
1st Amendment:  "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, ...".

SCOTUS, however, in its infinite nit-picking for the greater glory of money-power, robustly contends that it is not Congress.  On Tuesday, SCOTUS announced that it can by God abridge the freedom of speech any damned time and any damned way it freaking pleases.

Said SCOTUS: "We hold that when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline."

As with Bush v. Gore (violating the Constitutionally-defined process of presidential election), and as with Raich v. Gonzales (violating federalism and the 10th Amendment rights of states to determine what is legitimate medical practice, as well as the 9th Amendment rights of individuals to conform to legitimate state law in the use of medical marijuana), and as with Kelo v. City of New London (violating Constitutionally-defined eminent domain), Garcetti is a purely unconstitutional ruling, abridging and  violating 1st amendment free speech.

It is the SCOTUS fascist thugs masquerading again as Supreme Court judges.

The assenting judges -- Roberts, Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito -- have violated the Constitution.  They have not protected the rights of citizens.  They have violated their oaths to uphold the Constitution.  Those factors, taken together, make the decision in Garcetti an act of treason against the nation -- as did the same factors in the findings of treason against the secessionist state legislators in the 1860s.

More important legally, the decision in Garcetti is a felony conspiracy against rights, in violation of federal statute 18 USC 241.  Felony forfeits judicial immunity.  By stipulation in 18 USC 241, the convicted co-conspirators can be fined and imprisoned for up to ten years.  Their life-time appointments to the federal bench are not a factor.  Do the felony.  Do the time.

Garcetti establishes an unconstitutional anti-law regime. Disposing of this case creates its own felony conspiracy against rights under 18 USC 241. Any future case disposed under its precedent creates its own felony conspiracy against rights under 18 USC 241. We can hold the SCOTUS Thugs responsible for understanding this ongoing legal snarl before their decision was made.

The assenting judges in Garcetti are all constitutional criminals and felons-in-waiting.  Their only proper place is in federal prison.

The only reason that the Supreme Thugs will not be criminally prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned is because they are part of the dual-party, three-branch, Bush-Cheney fascist despotism.   Constitutional criminal and felon-in-waiting Gonzales, and all his little goosesteppers at the DOJ, have their obstruction of justice act down pat.

There's no help coming.

The Democratic party is up to its eyeballs in the Bush-Cheney Usurpation, which is its own, rolling, anti-law regime.  Give the bought-out, sold-out Democrats the power, and the despotism goes on.  It's their job.  It's been their job since Bush v. Gore. If you can't see that in their behavior and performance, then you're too servile to deal with.  Elect any one of them without a signed "tough-love" pledge and an angry constituency in hover mode, and all you can expect is a re-play of Clinton's reneging on all of his campaign reform promises immediately after Election 1992.

We the sovereign people are the only help we get.

It's on us to force politicians to bring down the Bush-Cheney Abomination and renew the Constitution so that nothing like this dual-party, three-branch despotism can ever be perpetrated against us again.  This will require dominating citizen action, signaling the politicians in certain terms that we are coming for them, and that we will strip them of their social, economic, and political power.

We are the sovereign here.  We will ensure the destruction of our nation if we continue to let the predators fool us with their Machiavellian deceits.

Forward, fully independent, national citizen lawmaking melded with a still-strong but heavily-regulated representative government.  Forward, 2nd National Constitutional Convention, strongly protected by generic legislation formulated by citizen proposals and passed into constitutional law in the states.

Among the 2nd NCC's regulating provisions for the federal bench, (1) a mass firing of all federal bench judges, in preparation for elections by direct referendums in each Court's jurisdiction, (2) making every federal bench judge subject to the recall, and (3) a list of prior unconstitutional rulings that are forever barred from use as precedent.

Forward, Constitutional renewal.

Cross-posted from DD Revival, © by Stephen Neitzke, 2006.

Tags: 1st Amendment Free Speech, Bush v Gore, Bush-Cheney, Garcetti v Ceballos, Kelo v City of New London, Raich v Gonzales, SCOTUS (all tags)



Is that photo real?

Sheez, if it hasn't been photoshopped, it sure says more than a thousand words.

by misscee 2006-05-31 06:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Is that photo real?

"About" Political Humor says this photo is doctored.  However, Bush's middle finger flip-offs are well-documented.  Google "bush middle-finger".  There's a very good piece on Bush obscenities on Capital Hill Blue (conservo-whackos) at blish/article_7267.shtml.

by Stephen Neitzke 2006-05-31 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

Supreme Court Judges can be removed from their unelected positions for any kind of bad behavior, according to the constitution. Allowing blatantly unconstitutional rulings to occur without attempting to prevent them is a direct violation of their oath to protect the Constitution, and represents the most reprehensible kind of bad behavior. A majority of the House and two thirds of the Senate ought to do it. No special impeachment process is necessary.

by blues 2006-05-31 06:19AM | 0 recs
Re: SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

blues --

You're OK -- I'm OK.  You're right about impeachment.  It should already be happening.  However, I'm not describing a "special impeachment" when I discuss criminal prosecution for felony conspiracy under 18 USC 241.  The two actions are very separate consequences of  federal judges committing felony violations of federal statutes.  Impeachment and removal ends with removal -- there is no further remedy available.  Separately, it is the duty of the district's US attorney to convene a grand jury and bring a criminal indictment in federal court.  Felony prosecution goes from there and, in the case of federal judges who have committed felonies, ends in their probable imprisonment.

by Stephen Neitzke 2006-05-31 06:44AM | 0 recs
Re: SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

From time to time, I have been mentioning that we happen to have a vast criminal conspiracy, which the media branch of the media-financial complex insists on pretending is our "government." Thus a "revolution" in the normal sense is not a possibility. It could only amount to a mass citizen's arrest.

by blues 2006-05-31 10:02AM | 0 recs
Re: SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

blues --

Peaceful revolutionary change has been my core topic for the past dozen years.  Please read Hamilton's "Federalist 78" as a starting point.  I think you'll be interested to find that the 1780s Federalists acknowledged the rights of the people to alter the Constitution significantly, if they make that change in a "solemn and authoritative" event.

Using the seccessions of states leading to the Civil War as an argument aginst peaceful revolutionary change doesn't work.  Although the "keepers of the Union" ultimately relented to war to put down the sedition, seccession was the furthest thing from a "solemn and authoritative" act of changing the Constitution.  It was, in fact, an open sedition that unconstitutionally  denied the rights of the US citizens in its geographical area.

Article 5 of the Constitution allows the people to choose the holding of a constitutional convention by simply announcing it.  It allows the people to hold a "solemn and authoritative" act of change.

I'm not saying that our "keepers of the Union" would treat such an event fairly.  They might make war on any attempt of ours to create a 2nd NCC (national constitutional convention).  If they did, however, it would very probably be -- one way or another -- wall-to-wall bloody revolution.  I doubt that most Americans will ever cave in to an absolute despotism -- no matter how swimmingly this proto-despotism is going for the superrich, the corporate predators, and the predator politicians.

There's nothing written that says we have to stay docile and servile until after we've responsibly handled a solemn 2nd NCC.  We the sovereign people have powers that most have not dreamt of.

Please work your way through the 4 parts of  my "Bush-Cheney Trainwreck -- Undo".  I think you'll find some interesting ideas in there on how we can use the powers we have to accomplish a peaceful revolution.

See the full and finished version of "Undo" on my blog, "DD Revival" ( ).  It was originally posted 17 May 2006.

Good luck to us all.  If any catastrophe happens to collapse our national economy -- several possibilities -- while we're collectively twiddling our thumbs, things will get really complicated.

by Stephen Neitzke 2006-05-31 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

Obviously, this is a very tricky set of issues. The most elementary notions of what patriotism, or even elementary, basic citizenship, are being tested to their absolute limits. The very legitimacy of our government is in fact in a state of impeachment.

The worst part of it all is that, in my opinion, education has ceased to exist in the U.S.A. I have been severely attacked for taking that position. But I must say what I believe. The average American is lacking in basic intellectual functionality. It has been allowed to happen. I am aware that perhaps a majority of people who inhabit this particular blog are in the education business. And they simply cannot accept this. But it is high time for them to ask "who am I working for?" Might not that Board of Education be comprised of invaders from the media-financial complex? Hmm?

by blues 2006-05-31 11:32AM | 0 recs
Re: SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

Crucial vs. Important Issues

blues --

We all have our own priority systems for political problems.  For years after beginning my DD political project in early 1994, I made long lists.  And then the horrendous unconstitutionality of the Bush-Cheney anti-law regime happened.

My list was quickly reduced to only three crucial problems: (1) end the Bush-Cheney Illegitimacy with impeachments and criminal prosecutions, (2) rip its illegal statutes out of our legal fabric, and (3) make Constitutional changes that give us the best chances of preventing anything like Bush-Cheney from ever happening again.

Everything else is important, but can wait.  Until the crucial problems are handled, we will not have the power to put our good solutions into place against the power of the predators.

We have multiple "expert citizen groups" working in every important societal problem area.  Good for them.  I hope they don't give up the fight.  I hope they keep on, developing their expertise.  We will need them desperately, as soon as we have the powers of fully independent, national citizen lawmaking.  But until then, we can't help them.

Imagine the attention we can give to education with our political dynamic running on nonpartisan elections, nonpartisan unicamerals (on the successful 1934 Nebaraska model), and nonpartisan national citizen lawmaking.

Imagine the legitimacy we can give to our nonpartisan national activities by using "double majorities" -- the Swiss legitimacy steamroller for their national-level citizen lawmaking.  It's an approving majority of all those voting, plus  approving majorities of those voting in a majority of states.    

We don't have democracy right, nationally -- not yet.  But we're closer, I think, than most Americans know.

Looking at the history of the Reform Era -- from the co-op economics of the Nat'l Farmer's Alliance in the late 1870s, to the People's Party of the late 1880s to the late 1890s, to the muckrakers bridge between Populists and Progressives, to the increases of direct democracy forced by the citizens of 26 states, 1898-1918 -- it's easy to catch hope for the increasing of our own political sophistication.

Our solving of the crucial problems depends on our political sophistication.  Right now, we don't have it.

Getting it would be realtively easy.  There are several things we can do to make the civics lessons flow like water.  But effort is required.  And I think the motivation for doing the work is not in us yet.

I hope the next catastrophe will kick us over the edge.  I hope it will not be a nation-destroying catastrophe.

by Stephen Neitzke 2006-05-31 02:58PM | 0 recs
Re: SCOTUS Thugs At It Again

Our solving of the crucial problems depends on our political sophistication.  Right now, we don't have it.

Getting it would be realtively easy.  There are several things we can do to make the civics lessons flow like water.  But effort is required.  And I think the motivation for doing the work is not in us yet.

I do believe this is what we desperately need to hope for, Stephen Neitzke. I'd start a new religion if that's what it takes. I rather think myself vastly better suited to be a wild-eyed preacher type than the political hustler model.

by blues 2006-06-01 06:58AM | 0 recs
Civics lessons for political sophistication

blues --

Heh-heh.  I think some old-school citizenship is all we need.  But feel free to get wild-eyed.

Here are thumb-nails for a few of the civics lessons campaigns that have occurred to me.  You might have add-ons.

(1) Reducing the now-mega-corrupt state legislatures from partisan bicameral to nonpartisand unicameral in as many as possible of the 17 states in which citizens have the CAI (constitutional amendment initiative) and bicamerals.  The 17 target states are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Moussouri, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, and South Dakota.

Nebraska citizens used their CAI in 1934 to cut their corrupt bicameral to a nonpartisan unicameral.  Just eliminating the "conference committee" causes a huge reduction of corruption.  You can read about it on the Nebraska legislature's site, in the piece, "The History of Nebraks's Unicameral Legislature".

(2) In 1996, the Clinton administration killed a research project that was working on algae biodiesel.  The project team had just proven in broad outline how the US can replace ALL of its annual road transport fuel needs with homegrown algae biodiesel.  They were at work on the details when money-power schemed the corruptions needed to kill the project.

You can read about the project's revelations, the ease with which we could have been independent of Middle East oil BEFORE Bush's War, and the pick-up work done since by the UNH (Univ New Hampshire) Biodiesel Group, in Michael Briggs' essay, "Widescale Biodiesel Production from Algae".  

Our civics lessons project here is to promt the development of home-production units that can produce enough algae biodiesel "feedstock" to provide biodlesel for a family with two diesel-engined cars and a diesel-fuel-powered furnace.  Additionally, we need to prompt the development of small, but still profitable, biorefineries -- where a local area's algae feedstock from home production units can be processed into biodiesel fuel.

Needless to say, diesel/electric hybrid cars would be great for an algae biodiesel economy, but money-power -- obviously seeing that such vehicles would be a magnet for more algae biodiesel production -- are making all kinds of stupid noises to keep from having to make diesel/electric hybrids.

Part of our civics lessons project would be putting pressure on car makers to manufacture diesel/electric hybrids.

Another part of our project would be formulating new federal statutes to mandate volume production of algae biodiesel to ensure national independence from foreign petrofuel sources.  The Briggs essay has all the pointers we need to get this started.

(3) Boycotting really bad, stateless, "multi-national" corporations is not a new idea.  There are several citizen groups trying, I think.  We need a huge, nation-wide organization to plow effort into this.  If we can stop the purchase of a corporation's goods/services in the US marketplace, we quickly end that corporation's existence.  None of those rat-bastards can survive without the US marketplace.

The advertising for our boycott project would, of course, spotlight the social justice reasons for our actions.  Presto -- instant civics lessons.

Let these babies perk through your brain.  Imagining the citizen action groups needed to make them work is a rush all by itself.  

by Stephen Neitzke 2006-06-01 09:16AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads