The Supreme Court Of The United States today upheld a lower court ruling regarding the 2003 Texas congressional districts changes designed by Tom Delay and implemented by Texas Republicans. Read the ruling here on the SCOTUS website.
One of the interesting things I noted in the dissenting opinion on District 23 is this:
Of the individuals removed from District 23, 90 percent of those of voting age were Latinos, and 87 percentvoted for Democrats in 2002. Id., at 489. The District Court concluded that these individuals were removed because they voted for Democrats and against Bonilla, not because they were Latino.
This is important. One of the major claims was that this district was sliced and diced on the basis of race, not political affiliation or voting patterns. The majority opinion lays out the "so called Gingles requirements":
(1) the racial group is "suffi-ciently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district"; (2) the racial group is "politically cohesive"; and (3) the majority "vot[es] sufficiently as a bloc to enable it . . . usually to defeat the minority's preferred candidate." Johnson v. De Grandy, 512 U. S. 997, 1006-1007 (1994) (quoting Growe, 507 U. S., at 40 (in turn quoting Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U. S. 30, 50-51 (1986))).
More after the jump ...
All of the opinions revolve on either arguments against or for meeting the Gingles requirements. The minority opinion from Scalia, Thomas, and Alito also argue:
JUSTICE KENNEDYâ€™s discussion of appellantsâ€™ political-gerrymandering claims ably demonstrates that, yet again, no party or judge has put forth a judicially discernable standard by which to evaluate them. See ante, at 6â€“16. Unfortunately, the opinion then concludes that the appellants have failed to state a claim asto political gerrymandering, without ever articulating whatthe elements of such a claim consist of. That is not an available disposition of this appeal. We must either con-clude that the claim is nonjusticiable and dismiss it, or else set forth a standard and measure appellantâ€™s claim against it. Vieth, supra, at 301. Instead, we again dispose of thisclaim in a way that provides no guidance to lower-court judges and perpetuates a cause of action with no discernible content. We should simply dismiss appellantsâ€™ claims as nonjusticiable.
Which is basically saying that there is no real way to determine if the claim is true or not, and therefore should be dismissed outright. They go on to say that since it wasn't dismissed, the ruling is worthles to lower-court judges, and allows a case to continue that should be immediately stopped. This is also important. This is what people are talking about when they say that judges are out of control, and rule beyond the basis of the law. Scalla's opinion here illuminates this idea here in full detail for the world to see.
This is a very important case, even for Americans ouside the 100k who the majority felt had their rights infringed. It's important for us all.
The new conservative government has proposed several bills, one of which aims to halt the worthless and infamous Canadian Gun Registry. According to an article from the Boston Globe, this comes at the behest of liberals in Canada that still believe the registry has some kind of positive effect against crime and doesn't trample on any legal Canadians rights. I think it's a positive step in the right direction. With the recent UN anti-gun rallies happening on July 4th (gee ... what a coincidence) in New York, it couldn't come at a better time. Here are some basic facts:
* Initial cost estimate: $119 million
* Current cose estimate: $2 billion
* Current estimated income from registry fees: $140 million
* Criminals convicted as a result of registry: 0
It's that last statistic that makes you wonder just what else they could have done with $2 billion that would have resulted in at least 1 convicted criminal ... Maybe some new equipment for the RCMP ... just about anything would have provided more than 0 arrests
I'm sure some of you have already seen it, but for those like me who haven't, you have to check out the website for the new Phillips electric "BodyGroom" shaver for men. They have a marketing website in Flash setup at http://www.shaveeverywhere.com. A female co worker showed it to me and I blew snot all over my shirt I laughed so hard. Find out what I heard after the jump ...
The longer you wait, the longer your pubes are gonna get.
I'm an ultra hyper-patriot. There ... I've said it ... I love this country ... Apparently, some people don't agree with me. Take the moronic Dixie Chicks' latest comments for example:
"A lot of pandering started going on, and you'd see soldiers and the American flag in every video. It became a sickening display of ultra-patriotism."
"The entire country may disagree with me, but I don't understand the necessity for patriotism," Maines resumes, through gritted teeth. "Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country... I don't see why people care about patriotism."
Why are we so hyper patriotic? Because this is the best fucking country in the world, that's why! I can wake up at 3:30am and drive to any one of several 24-HR Walgreens and pickup Insulin, Diet Pepsi, and a Maxim Magazine. Does it get much better than that? Most people just don't realize how good we have it here. Try spending a week in Britain ... Everything closes down at 5:30. Just try to buy a big screen plasma TV at 8:00pm ... It's not happening!
I'm so sick of hearing liberals whining about this and that ... oh ... the government is looking at my phone records ... I have to pay for my own abortion ... I don't want to see that cross anymore that has been up for over a hundred years ... Shut the fuck up! Juxtapose that whining with this story from the escalating violence in Sri Lanka:
The Tigers said they had few details of what had happened, but each side blamed the other for hitting a church that was sheltering civilians. Some 50 civilians were wounded, the military spokesman said, saying rebels had thrown grenades into it as they withdrew.
But rebel media coordinator Daya Master said the military had shelled the church.
You think having to pay for your own abortion sucks? At least the US military doesn't chase people into churches before lobbing hand grenades inside.
A post over at Michelle Malkin's caught my eye. Apparently, there is a guy in a band named the Sweater Kittenz that has the Marine brass, and the usual suspects all pissed off. When I first heard "Sweater Kittens" my thoughts went straight to the Urban Dictionary definition:
Absolutely adorable breasts molded into perfect round balls when a girl puts on a really soft and fuzzy and touchable sweater.