Symposium: The SCOTUS suicide pact
&Ndash; Truth.Characters:
Socrates Justice Kennedy Justice Scalia Attorney ACLU President Barack Obama Professors Cloward and Piven
Socrates: We are gathered here today at my Symposium to revisit this extraordinary question: If what Justice Robert Jackson said in a 1949 dissenting opinion [ Terminiello ] is true that the U.S. Constitution is not a suicide pact, then what should be done to those traitors (including judges and politicians) who have worked fanatically and ceaselessly to turn the Constitution's liberties and freedoms against We the People and in effect transformed the Constitution into a suicide pact?
I present this dialectical question to this Symposium in the context of the recent 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision ordering California to release tens of thousands of prison inmates.
Attorney ACLU: Reducing the number of people in prison not only would save the state taxpayers half a billion annually, it would lead to the implementation of truly rehabilitative programs that lower recidivism rates and create safer communities.
Justice Kennedy: { arrogant tone moderate, or "swing vote," on this court of last appeal, I am in essence a one-man dictatorship. If I choose to vote with the conservatives, then the Framers' original intent will be the law. If I choose to vote with the socialist wing of the court, then socialism, communism, anarchy and genocide will be the law of the land.
The law, the Constitution, is what I, Justice Anthony Kennedy, say it is!
Socrates: This isn't the first time in the history of American jurisprudence that a radical judge tried to usurp powers not expressly enumerated to the judicial branch by the Constitution. In the early 1830s, President Andrew Jackson was incensed at Chief Justice John Marshall's two decisions in Cherokee Nations v. Georgia (1831) and Worcester v. Georgia (1832) where Marshall upheld the Cherokee Indians' rights to lands within Georgia and held, in part, that:
In this case [Worcester v. Georgia], Chief Justice John Marshall went further and opined that the Cherokee nation was a distinct political community having territorial boundaries within which the state of Georgia had no right to enter except with the permission of the Cherokees.Worcester V Georgia - News
In the early 1830s, President Andrew Jackson was incensed at Chief Justice John Marshall's two decisions in Cherokee Nations v. Georgia (1831) and Worcester v. Georgia (1832) where Marshall upheld the Cherokee Indians' rights to lands within Georgia
(T&G Staff/STEVE LANAVA) WORCESTER — South High Community School celebrated its graduation ceremony yesterday at the DCU Center. The graduates are: Shqiprim Aliu (H), Brittany E. Alkes (HH), Antonio R. Allen, Jahnelle L. Alston Madison,
Andrew Jackson Worcester vs Georgia: OurStory.com - Capture your ...
Georgia had been relentless to strip Cherokee lands and deny them rights. A minister named Samuel Worcester had been in the Cherokee Nation, helping the Cherokees. The Georgian government declared that white persons must have a permit in order to live in Cherokee lands, after noticing Worcester's influential power. After repealing to the Supreme Court, the Court ruled that the Cherokee nation had its right to have a title for its territory, and that the Georgian government could not do that. Although the Supreme Court ruled that, Jackson and Georgia ignored that decision.
We offer you the option of browsing images from Yahoo! Image Search for use in your OurStory entries. These publicly-submitted images are not screened or endorsed by our service and may contain objectionable content.
If you are concerned about appropriate content, please select your Settings link (in the upper right corner, next to your Profile photo) and choose Off in Post Image Recommendations, found under System Features on the right side of your screen.
Worcester V Georgia - Bookshelf
Worcester V. Georgia, American Indian Rights
Worcester v. Georgia, Samuel Austin Worcester's pivital decisions
Worcester v. Georgia, Cherokees, the American Board and the nullification crisis
The constitutional law of the United States
Worcester v. Georgia. ln the great case of Worcester v. ... Thi- case, like Cherokee Xation v. Georgia, grew out of the attempt of Georgia to exercise ...Georgia and state rights, A study of the political history of Georgia from the Revolution to the Civil War, with particular regard to federal relations
Acts of Georgia General Assembly. 1831, pp. 2.i9. 2«». 6 For report of the case Worcester v. Georgia, see 6 Peters, p. 515 et seq. H. Doc. 702. pt. ...Day-to-day Information Directory
Worcester v. Georgia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832), was a case in which the United States ... The Georgia state courts had previously been deferential to Worcester because of ...
New Georgia Encyclopedia: Worcester v. Georgia (1832)
In the court case Worcester v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court held in 1832 that the ... A Georgia judge released Worcester when his lawyers argued that he ...
Worcester v. Georgia: West's Encyclopedia of American Law ...
Worcester v. Georgia • 6 Pet. 515 (1832) • Vote: 5–1 • For the Court: Marshall • Dissenting: Baldwin In the early 19th century, the Cherokee people
WORCESTER V. GEORGIA, 31 U. S. 515 :: Volume 31 :: 1832 :: US ...
1832 -- Volume 31 -- WORCESTER V. GEORGIA, 31 U. S. 515 -- United States Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez
Worcester v. Georgia | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent ...
The Oyez Project, Worcester v. Georgia , 31 U.S. 515 (1832) ... They were indicted under an 1830 act of the Georgia legislature entitled "an act to prevent the exercise of ...