Total Posts:2|Showing Posts:1-2
Jump to topic:

Earl Warren is a hero

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2012 6:24:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The 1950s presented one of America's darkest hours for social justice. As evangelicals Christians and intolerant Conservative Republicans persecuted many and conformity and alienation plagued the country, the Supreme Court stood as the only true guardian of the Constitution.

Jencks v. US and Yates v. US both defended the victims of McCarthyism, and attacked the Smith Act which was a violation of First Amendment. Engel v. Vitale banned laws that authorized prayer in school, preventing any kind of state sponsorship of religion. Miranda v. Arizona and Gideon v. Wainwright both defended those accused of crimes from being exploited. Roe v. Wade defended a woman's right to her body and her body's possessions....and how can we forget the greatest of them all, Brown v. Board of Education.

I feel a need to point this out perhaps to counter the repulsive upsurge in overzealous conservatism. It is a fact that Earl Warren defended those alienated by a highly Christian Republican dominated society which disregarded the freedom and equality secured by the Constitution, in favor of their religious beliefs.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2012 6:50:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/1/2012 6:24:59 PM, 000ike wrote:
The 1950s presented one of America's darkest hours for social justice. As evangelicals Christians and intolerant Conservative Republicans persecuted many and conformity and alienation plagued the country, the Supreme Court stood as the only true guardian of the Constitution.

Jencks v. US and Yates v. US both defended the victims of McCarthyism, and attacked the Smith Act which was a violation of First Amendment. Engel v. Vitale banned laws that authorized prayer in school, preventing any kind of state sponsorship of religion. Miranda v. Arizona and Gideon v. Wainwright both defended those accused of crimes from being exploited. Roe v. Wade defended a woman's right to her body and her body's possessions....and how can we forget the greatest of them all, Brown v. Board of Education.

I feel a need to point this out perhaps to counter the repulsive upsurge in overzealous conservatism. It is a fact that Earl Warren defended those alienated by a highly Christian Republican dominated society which disregarded the freedom and equality secured by the Constitution, in favor of their religious beliefs.

First...Cases do not BAN laws or Statutes. The opinion,of the majority, determines the outcome of the case. The Court has THREE Choices, affirm, Reverse, Affirm in Part Reverse in Part.

In Brown, which Im guessin you have not read, the Court affirms that there is such a thing as separate but equal (SBE). It does this implicitly by claiming SBE to be unconstitutional. The Court then moves to abolish, not white institutions, but Black. The court holds, that the only difference being color blacks should be permitted in a white institution. The effects are still with us. Traditionally African American Universities lost their best students to the White Universities, diminishing those long standing Institutions, (Grambling, Southern, etc.) Thus Warren holds that White professors are far better teachers than Block, otherwise Whites would have been admitted to those Black Universities.

Re. the other cases you cite (sorta) you completely mischaracterise Yates in that it was remanded. There were 14 petitioners, the case dated to the FDR administration only five of whom were acquitted, the rest were remanded for a new Trial. Statute of Limitation and ex post facto were the issues not the first ammendment. (See Lemon) You got Wade all wrong too.