Name: Preemption Has Wingnut History - Shadowproof
Brand: shadowproof.com
SKU: shadowproof-com-12239
Availability: OnlineOnly

critic

Preemption Has Wingnut History - Shadowproof

preview

The present wingnut outcry about the administration’s use of preemption to work against Arizona’s discriminatory use of law enforcement should be the subject of cartoonists. In the administration from Hell – though that’s not fair to Hell, where reputedly you only get punished for actual sins – the attempt to bring Federal Law to override state laws was an attempt to weaken individual rights to bring suit against pharmaceutical firms that did them harm.In that instance, the previous Department of Injustice sought to get the Supreme Court to rule that the weakened Federal statutes should prevail, since many states gave their own citizens the right to file suits for damages. The 2001 – 2008 administration was the protector and defender of corporate rights against individuals, and stood up for drugmaker Wyeth. In that instance, in 2006, the actually got it right and upheld states’ rights to protect their citizens.A Vermont jury awarded Levine $6.7 million in damages, and the Vermont Supreme Court upheld the decision in 2006. But Wyeth appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has now weighed in, putting the matter to rest.The three justices who ruled against Levine were John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Samuel Alito, Jr., who penned the dissenting opinion. "[I]t is odd (to say the least) that a jury in Vermont can now order for Phenergan what the FDA has chosen not to order for mustard gas," Alito wrote.Can’t you imagine what the present coathanger court will do with this precedent? Of course, Justice Kennedy seems to have been preempted by his winger colleagues and given over any consideration of individual rights. That he will join in any decision of the Robertian Scalitos is practically a certainty, and Justice Thomas has no use for dark skinned citizens.They can rule against Arizona because that state’s law usurps the federal government’s role in handling its borders, and once again break court precedent by reversing the earlier ruling that it is constitutional for state law to prevail. They can rule for Arizona because the precedent was set by this court previously, and watch the entire Latino community enraged at court-ordered discrimination. They can rule in other words, of course, but that will be the effect in either case.This court does more damage every day to the Rule of Law. I expect discrimination against dark skins to be approved, but would love to be proved wrong.Shadowproof is a financially independent news organization. All of our funding comes from small donations made by readers like you.We use your donations to hire freelance writers and cover our operating costs. Monthly membership subscriptions give us the stability we need to make plans while ensuring our organization does not depend on grants or major funders. If you like what you read, support our writers with a donation today.&nbsp;

The present wingnut outcry about the administration’s use of preemption to work against Arizona’s discriminatory use of law enforcement should be the subject of cartoonists. In the administration from Hell – though that’s not fair to Hell, where reputedly you only get punished for actual sins – the attempt to bring Federal Law to override state laws was an attempt to weaken individual rights to bring suit against pharmaceutical firms that did them harm.In that instance, the previous Department of Injustice sought to get the Supreme Court to rule that the weakened Federal statutes should...

public

Ruth Calvo

Reader-supported journalism dedicated to exposing abuses of power in business and government. Founded by @kgosztola & @bsonenstein.

shadowproof.com

Credible

Speculation

Anecdotal Evidence

Generalization

Stacking the Deck

Appeal to Authority

Straw Man

Slippery Slope

Emotional Appeal

Red Herring

False Dilemma

Illogical

Moral Equivalency

Ad Hominem

Correlation w/o Causation

Semantics

Begging the Question

Faulty Analogy

Non Sequitur

Bandwagon

Dogmatism

Failing Occam's Razor

Biased

Pure Opinion

Hit Piece

Racial Bias

National Bias

Religious Bias

Financial Incentive

Political Agenda

Gender Bias

Misused Image/Video

Study Misinterpreted

Mistake

Misused Term

Science Misrepresented

Factual Error

Satire

Surface Level

Lack of Reliable Sources

Sensational

Not Credible

Investigative

Balanced

Well Sourced

Great Context

sports

entertainment

U.S.

international

business

technology

science

culture

politics

media

health

Preemption Has Wingnut History - Shadowproof

No article scores yet.

CRITIC REVIEWS

PUBLIC REVIEWS