Just read - no comments needed

[David Lockmiller]

(06-27-2018 07:15 PM)JMadonna Wrote:  

(06-27-2018 06:31 AM)David Lockmiller Wrote:  The New York Times reported today:


Justice Sonia Sotomayor compared to the 1944 ruling that upheld the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II, Korematsu v. United States.

You'd really have to be ignorant of the past to believe that comparison. Korematsu v. United States. upheld an unprecedented assertion of executive power. It imposed military rule on civilians without a declaration of martial law and sentenced a segment of the population to internal exile under armed guard. These were Americans that suddenly had no country.

The travel ban merely restricts people from terrorist countries from entering the US. No one is imprisoned and no one takes their citizenship away from them.

This has been done many times by many presidents. The vote should have been 9-0.

I would suggest that one of your sentences should read: "These were Americans [citizens] that suddenly had no country."

"The Lost Battalion" refers to the 1st Battalion, 141st Infantry (36th Infantry Division, originally Texas National Guard), which was surrounded by German forces in the Vosges Mountains on 24 October 1944. The battalion was cut off by the Germans, and attempts by the 36th Division's other two battalions to extricate it failed. The final rescue attempt was made by the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, a segregated unit composed of Nisei, or second-generation Japanese Americans. The 442nd had been given a period of rest after heavy fighting to liberate Bruyères and Biffontaine, but General Dahlquist called them back early to relieve the beleaguered 2nd and 3rd Battalions of the 36th. In five days of battle, from 26 to 30 October 1944, the 442nd broke through German defenses and rescued 211 men.The 442nd suffered over 800 casualties. (Wikipedia)

It took the U.S. Supreme Court 76 years to admit its mistake. But it is not really the same court, is it. And, why now? There had been a "Republican President appointed" majority of the Supreme Court for quite some time. Perhaps the "Republican" justices majority wanted to demonstrate just how important "citizen" rights are in comparison to non-citizen rights in construing provisions of the U.S. Constitution. And, what better means to accomplish this than by immediately correcting a mistake made by the U.S. Supreme Court 76 years ago.

Justice Kennedy has announced his retirement. And, President Trump now has a list of "pro-life" candidates from which to choose his replacement. How long will the Roe v. Wade decision by the U.S. Supreme Court last in its present form, or any form?

Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell has already announced that there will be a confirmation vote of President Trump's pick this Fall, before the midterm elections. This is the same Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell who prevented a Senate confirmation vote for President Obama's pick to replace Justice Scalia, before the midterm elections at that time.

The New York Times reports:

Even as it upheld the travel ban, the court’s majority took a momentous step. It overruled the Korematsu case, officially reversing a wartime ruling that for decades has stood as an emblem of a morally repugnant response to fear.

Chief Justice Roberts said Tuesday’s decision was very different.

“The forcible relocation of U.S. citizens to concentration camps, solely and explicitly on the basis of race, is objectively unlawful and outside the scope of presidential authority,” he wrote. “But it is wholly inapt to liken that morally repugnant order to a facially neutral policy denying certain foreign nationals the privilege of admission.”

“The entry suspension is an act that is well within executive authority and could have been taken by any other president — the only question is evaluating the actions of this particular president in promulgating an otherwise valid proclamation,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote.

Justice Sotomayor accused her colleagues in the majority of “unquestioning acceptance” of the president’s national security claims. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined Justice Sotomayor’s dissent.

In a second, milder dissent, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, joined by Justice Elena Kagan, questioned whether the Trump administration could be trusted to enforce what he called “the proclamation’s elaborate system of exemptions and waivers.”

Justice Kennedy agreed that Mr. Trump should be allowed to carry out the travel ban, but he emphasized the need for religious tolerance.