Boerne revisited and other issues...

I was reading some of the Washington Post headlines this morning and one caught my eye. The article (on the partial birth abortion case headed to the SCT) contained a link to the actual law in question. (at least someone on the Post staff knows how to research!) At the beginning, under Section 2, (8), I saw something that reminded me of Borne v. Flores.

However, under well-settled Supreme Court jurisprudence, the United States Congress is not bound to accept the same factual findings that the Supreme Court was bound to accept in Stenberg under the "clearly erroneous" standard. Rather, the United States Congress is entitled to reach its own factual findings; findings that the Supreme Court accords great deference; and to enact legislation based upon these findings so long as it seeks to pursue a legitimate interest that is within the scope of the Constitution, and draws reasonable inferences based upon substantial evidence.

Like the birth of the RFRA, the partial birth ban was carefully crafted to both recognize and deny Supreme Court precedent. Each branch seems to have a knowledge of how things are supposed to be run, but in the end, they wind up making decisions that often contradict that knowledge. 'Separation of powers' is touted in concept, but denied in practice. Boerne is most certainly one such case.

The buzz in recent SCOTUS news, though, has been all about O'Connor's replacement: Samuel Alito. His first day on the bench was intriguing, especially in the eyes of the Post, but so far nothing to shock anyone. Yet Alito has the vague reputation of supporting the ban. With Alito in the picture, it will likely mean Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito all vote together. I don't hope for a majority win in this case, but perhaps, perhaps...we could snag a Stevens or Breyer.

All in all, I do wonder what the Partial Birth Ban's fate will be in Gonzalez v. Carhart.




I saw this earlier today, and I tend to agree. Definitely priceless.





I am all about Cruise Missiles.

Dear Rachel?

*In an attempt at sattire, the following is completely fictitious and has no bearing on current events. Or does it?*

I recently received a letter from the UN asking for advice on how to force the United States to close its Guantanamo Bay prison facility. I shall post my response here:

Dear United Nations Human Rights Council,

Esteemed members, I was deeply gratified to receive your letter of yore and would consider it a great honor to advise your future actions.

First, since you really hold no legal sway over the United States, you’ll have to use persuasive tactics in order to bring Washington around to your noble motive. As history has proven time and time again, it is the people of the United States who really run the show. Thanks to a lack of accurate civic and historical education over the last sixty years, it’s not terribly difficult to make Americans think their country stinks, even if it really doesn’t. So you’ll have to present your case to the court of American public opinion before the American government will pay any attention to your cries. Americans have always responded to the calls of justice and equality. Those should be your sticking points.

Second, the American press is your best friend. Since the Nixon scandals, the press has become an enlightened member of the elite society who really knows what’s going on in the world. They tend to agree with us on Bush’s real status as a dictator even though the rest of America has not recognized it yet. They still enjoy scooping one another; so keep the various newspapers in the highest state of anticipation about your report through as many strategic ‘leaks’ as possible. Remember, the object is to convince the American people. With utmost respect to the members of the Council, reports that stretch longer than ten pages and contain l larger words than two syllables are generally considered very dull. But if a reputable paper, such as the New York Times, the LA times, or the Washington Post (?) has been dangling juicy bits of scandal and intrigue, you’ll have them all right where they need to be. Ready to pound down the great doors of Congress and pull apart the White House in order to achieve justice.

Finally, remember that there is strength in numbers and something that has been said once definitely bears repeating. Just because the allegations of naked prisoners, flushed Korans, and the denial of trial have already been propagated before is no reasons not to repeat them in stronger force. Yes, the US has already responded to these attacks, but it’s been said that if you repeat a thing often enough, the people will believe it; that my friends, is your ultimate goal.


I hope this missive has been helpful to you as you lay your plans for the onslaught. Just remember to keep the press one step ahead of the Republicans and don’t worry so much about the truth. As the honorable Albert Gore Jr., the one who invented the internet, once said: : “When the facts don’t fit the theory, change the facts.”


Best Wishes,


Rachel



P.S. In the unlikely event your campaign to remove GTB from the list of US prisons backfires, change the subject to Iran.

Princess Rachel and Mohamed

Of Princesses

Most little girls, when they are very young, like to play house, take care of their dollies, and most of all, they love to dress up in old finery; long forgotten by its original owner, the cast-off clothing takes on new life in the mind of little girls as they pretend that they are grand princesses who hold high tea (really it's water) with a fine gentleman or an elegant lady (teddy bears and dollies serve this purpose quite nicely).

I never could get into the princess part. I didn't want to be in a castle, but I did dream of fine dinner parties, candle-lit ballrooms, and a bit more, well, in charge.

As I flipped through some of our art resource books in the library at work today, those childhood dreams came flooding back. Images of grand parlors, inaugural balls, and the stately decorum of the Capitol building gently settled into my consciousness.

Having actually been there a couple of times, it wasn't hard to close my eyes and actually feel the wind on capitol hill, hear the pigeons, and remember the feeling of seeing my first protestor.

Yes, I love DC.

I know it's one of the most dangerous cities in the US, and I know that if you're not a criminal, you're probably a crook. Going over the history of our capitol, though, and discovering the things that are there makes me want to find a roomate, pack up and move tomorrow.

At the very least, I caught myself planning to spend a week there if I don't make it to PHC this fall.

But enough of that...I have more important things to speak of: namely, our wimpy press.

Freedom of the Press

I know, it's nothing new. In fact, it's as old as the Nixson administration. I just can't understand, though, how it is that out of thousands of employees, not one columnist, editor, or reporter has had the guts to republish the crazy mohamed cartoons.

First, let me say that I think the muslims are reacting like so many international four-year olds. There is absolutely no good going to come of burning, pillaging, rioting, and otherwise making a scene.

Finally, I shall also add that I find all but maybe TWO of those cartoons actually amusing. The others are either quite sobering, or downright boring.

I'll identify my favs...no worries.


This one was rather boring, to my mind. Much like a sunday school image. Anyone offended? No? ok. We'll keep moving.


















This one was actually quite cute. Offensive? Hardly.
















This one could be adopted as a national symbol. It's kind of neat looking. But I guess that shows how much I know about Muslim sentiments.







Now THIS one was funny. Truly worth a laugh or two, with a nice message behind it - just like a good political cartoon.

















I don't know why, but I found this one amusing too. The women can see, and the men can't. So HA!.














Yeah guys, chill out, ok already?






Ah yes. Bombhead.
I like it. And it's accurate. Muslims are always so proud of their suicide bombers. They go on the internet and claim them with pride. They make tapes without subtitles and drive each other into religious frenzies over the celebratory acts of their comrades.











Ok, even though I haven't the foggiest as to what the "orange" is doing there, it induced a giggle.

Why, O why...

... can't we all be more like this:

"Ok class. The topic of tonight's discussion is going to be the constitutionality of throwing the SuperBowl refs into Lake Michigan."

Til next time...

Pressing On

As I sit in front of a blazing fireplace (but not too close!) with my pineapple-upside-down cake, milk, and con-law materials, I'm struck with how simply complicated life can be.

The scene around me is perfectly simplistic and I am quite contented.
In fact, life in general has me completely happy. I guess what becomes complicated is maintaining the status quo. The next day is never something to fear, but there are always the insignificant details that somehow make me wish I could always just live in the moment that has me the most contented.

As I was running today, though, I realized that if you don't keep moving, (especially when you're as out of shape as I am), you loose your nerve to press on. A stationary position is ok for a minute or two, but after a while, well, there's nothing that frustrates me more than an unchanging atmosphere.

In short?

I like the way Paul said it:

I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.