Amazon.com Widgets
  • But of course!

    Today's morals and values are changing every single day. The Supreme Court doesn't reflect the majority of it's people's concerns or opinions. This mixed in with too much power, for too long, and it's technical illiteracy is a recipe for disaster. When we let someone like Mitch McConnell decide that Trump, not Obama, should appoint our next justice... We should be ashamed of ourselves.

  • Look at all the people being found innocent after serving 20 years in prison.

    Prisoners who are innocent are there because of the uncaring of the Supreme Court Judges. In Jackson v. Virginia 443 U.S. 307 (1979), the Supreme Court made it the law of the land that, "if any rational mind could find guilt, then the conviction will stand". What this means is, it doesn't matter how many mistakes are made at the trial, no matter how flimsy the evidence is, the person will stay in prison.
    At trial all 12 persons of the jury must find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but the police, the prosecutors and the judge will and do, just about any thing knowing they are immune, lie, mislead and fraud the jury. All these errors become, HARMLESS ERRORS DUE TO OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE, in the Appeals Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. These Appeal Courts will never reverse errors at the trial if "just one person could have found guilt" the debate then becomes what is the minimum IQ requirements of this one juror, after all the other 11 jurors don't see it.
    Jackson v. Virginia should be overturned and the Supreme Court review at the same burden of guilt at the trial, all 12 persons of the jury must find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as it has always been before this case. Today a prisoner has to prove he is innocent which is just about impossible, if just one witness who is looking at jail time for another crime unrelated to the one on trial and the jury is not told about the real reason for their testifying, any juror can find guilt when the person is innocent.
    Police, prosecutors and the judges who knowingly commits an error to cause someone to go to prison should themselves sent to prison, this would stop unfair trials
    Scalia once made a speech and said the,"that someone is innocent is not the question on reviewing for a new trial, but instead was the person given a reasonably fair trial". The whole court sees it this way that is why the Supreme Court almost never gives someone a new trial. There is nothing wrong with locking the innocent in prison (hell) for many years, (AS LONG AS IT IS SOMEONE ELSE WHO IT IS DONE TO).
    The Supreme Court is the reason the Police are killing so many people for no reason. When someone sues a policeman 98 out 100 cases are dismissed. The Judges always take the side of a police, they are the Judges' strong arm and protector.
    Look up "jail4judges" web site for a start in fixing the problem, a grand jury of ordinary people should be over the judges in this country, as it was pre 1960. Judges have been proven not to be able to oversee other Judges.

  • Nine old coots represent a bygone generation

    Sure, older people have a greater knowledge of the social and economic blunders and catastrophes that have befallen society over the long term, however, the robed elders are unaware of what it's like to be a younger American or even an average wage-earning American, since they have secure, well-paying jobs, and have old-age issues to face, rather than issues that confront younger Americans. We should be populating the Supreme Court with a blend of young, middle -aged, and older justices. That mix would introduce both, first-hand knowledge of negotiating current socio-economic issues, and experience in choosing the right path.

  • 5 dirty old men living in fancy houses are asskissers

    Living in an isolated and entitled environment where they are spoonfed and have little or no accountability including JOB LOSS, these turds cannot make decisions based on the real living and social conditions that exist for the average working american. What is needed here is a completely different working environment that forces these judges to come into actual contact with real Americans.

  • The Supreme Court is out of touch with the Constitution!

    The Supreme Court is a group of people who's duty is to uphold the law that is the constitution, after the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was passed, I think it became extremely clear that the Supreme Court is no longer looking out for the people's best interests, but instead for the best interests of big government, and more money for politicians and banks.

  • Yes, I think they are.

    I think most politicians are out of touch with everyday Americans. They are too busy making policy from "on high" to take the time to find out what's going on in the actual, real world. I think the Supreme Court is no exception. Their power is absolute, and they can make any decisions they want to, regardless of what the people think. Therefore, they don't have to bother being involved.

  • In certain respects, yes.

    I feel that certain issues, mostly ones relating to social issues and concerns such as equal rights, freedom of drugs, and immigration are being handled in a way that the youth of America has a problem with. The elderly nature of the supreme court makes it hard for the young people of today to feel like their voices are being heard.

  • Yes, the Supreme Court is out of touch with America

    The Supreme Court is charged with the responsibility to interpret our Constitution that guides our country. Instead, it has just turned into the political arm of whichever administration can appoint a judge that agrees with their positions. I don't understand how a 9 person panel has the right to defend or interpret a law on the basis of a 5-4 decision. It should require at least a two-thirds majority for any law to be passed. How can one person be the deciding factor to pass laws that will affect us for life, while you need a unanimous decision from a jury in a drug trial. That makes no sense to me.

  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.