Thread: Administration keeps on losing in court

Funny that Scalia and Alito seem to value a property owner's access to the courts much more than they do that of the worker in Ledbetter. As for the health care provisions that is strictly a political battle and would not even be litigated if a republican president had written it.
But yes you are right the Obama admin is all about government power over citizens. Especially the powers to surveille and imprison without due process. This admin has also prosecuted more whistleblowers already than w did in eight years. I doubt the supremes will limit any government power over citizens that can be covered by the fig leaf of national security.

The Ledbetter case was strictly an interpretation of a Congressional statute. The liberal justices, as usual, wanted to just ignore the law because it didn't get the result they wanted. I guess even recently passed laws are "living, breathing" things.

Originally Posted by adaher

...
Seriously, has any administration ever gotten into such consistent conflict with the Supreme Court? And can anyone really make the case that this is because the Supreme Court is conservative?

If you are going to start a thread, why not include the answer to this question?
What are the numbers on Supreme Court decisions?

Originally Posted by timj219

As for the health care provisions that is strictly a political battle and would not even be litigated if a republican president had written it.

You do not realize the irony of how big that if is? LOL

Originally Posted by goober

If you are going to start a thread, why not include the answer to this question?
What are the numbers on Supreme Court decisions?

The numbers are in the article.

Originally Posted by goober

If you are going to start a thread, why not include the answer to this question?
What are the numbers on Supreme Court decisions?

I'd have to be able to find a source on number of cases the administration lost vs. number of cases previous administrations lost. I know of no place where these numbers have been compiled and I wouldn't know where to find the info to do it myself.

Originally Posted by adaher

The Ledbetter case was strictly an interpretation of a Congressional statute. The liberal justices, as usual, wanted to just ignore the law because it didn't get the result they wanted. I guess even recently passed laws are "living, breathing" things.

The majority in Ledbetter ignored precedent and the obvious intent of congress as clearly expressed in black and white in order to protect corporations who illegally discriminated against workers. It was the most activist decision this country has ever seen. Even more activist than bush v gore.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

You do not realize the irony of how big that if is? LOL

That legislation could have been written by w or dozens of other prominent republicans. And if obama had not written it the next republican president would have. The legislation contains almost nothing the left wanted and except for tort restrictions contains everything republicans wanted.

Originally Posted by timj219

The majority in Ledbetter ignored precedent and the obvious intent of congress as clearly expressed in black and white in order to protect corporations who illegally discriminated against workers. It was the most activist decision this country has ever seen. Even more activist than bush v gore.

Are you talking about Ledbetter v. Goodyear?

If you are, that basically comes down to Ledbetter not filing suit inside the legally prescribed time period. Simple as that. I honestly was shocked to see such a case make it to the appellate courts, let alone USSC.

The rules were and are crystal clear. Ledbetter just didn't want them to apply to her. Tough shit.
- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by timj219

That legislation could have been written by w or dozens of other prominent republicans. And if obama had not written it the next republican president would have. The legislation contains almost nothing the left wanted and except for tort restrictions contains everything republicans wanted.

That is HIGHLY doubtful.

You realize not a single Republican voted for it, right? No, the ACA was not inevitable and no, a Republican President would not have written it.

Originally Posted by timj219

The majority in Ledbetter ignored precedent and the obvious intent of congress as clearly expressed in black and white in order to protect corporations who illegally discriminated against workers. It was the most activist decision this country has ever seen. Even more activist than bush v gore.

The law was clear: 180 days to sue. That was Congress' intent, that was the plain language of the law. T

Originally Posted by adaher

The law was clear: 180 days to sue. That was Congress' intent, that was the plain language of the law. T

Like i said - i'm shocked it made it to the appellate courts.

Some people just cannot accept that just because a case didn't go the way they wanted does not mean there was some nefarious intent. Sometimes the suit simply has no merit.

Her case was that the discrimination happened within the 180 day period, but if we were to accept that logic, then all statutes of limitations would be invalid.

Originally Posted by timj219

That legislation could have been written by w or dozens of other prominent republicans. And if obama had not written it the next republican president would have.

Remarkable. Republicans campaign against what you claim they would act for. By this logic, can we expect Obama and the Democrats to work to abolish abortion, civil rights, women's voting, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Planned Parenthood OR is it only health care that this logic applies?

Originally Posted by timj219

The legislation contains almost nothing the left wanted

You cannot be serious. The legislation was written by the Left and excluded Republicans from the process.