Drug Defendants Can Confront Their Accusers, Chemists

On Thursday, the Supreme Court handed down an important decision that could effect thousands of drug cases. The 5-4 ruling “reversed the conviction of a Massachusetts man found guilty of selling cocaine” after questionable evidence was introduced and declared that scientists and drug lab technicians who prepare reports for trials, can be called to the witness stand and thoroughly cross examined. Justices were kind of all over the place and shockingly, Antonin Scalia was the major proponent of the expanded 6th Amendment protection. |SCOTUSblog|

Supreme Court Rules Against Public School Strip Searches, Kinda

In an almost unanimous decision (8-1), the Supreme Court ruled that a public school violated a 13-year-old student’s 4th Amendment rights for executing a humiliating strip search with basically no evidence for something as silly as ibuprofen, better know by its street name: Advil. Well they didn’t find any and despite the court’s findings, the school officials involved in the illegal rights violating action will not be held liable. Justices also left a lot of ambiguity that doesn’t necessarily rule out future strip searches. |SCOTUSwiki|

Supreme Court Rules In Favor of Cocaine Customer

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a “man accused of two misdemeanors for allegedly arranging to buy 2 grams of cocaine over the phone cannot be charged with “facilitating” the dealer’s felonies.” Basically, some poor bastard with a “scary” name was upgraded to six felony counts for calling his dealer, who was being wiretapped by the FBI, on a cell phone for a Smurf-amount of blow. The government argued that he was “facilitating” the acts of the dealer by calling him and should therefore face more charges. Shockingly, a dumb ass jury concurred, deciding in favor of ruining Salman Khade Abuelhawa’s life. Thankfully, the court didn’t agree with either the government or the people. Read more »

Thanks To Activist Judges, Joe the Plumber Can Vote

Although Joe the Republican probably hates the Supreme Court and their Constitution supporting agenda, like Obama’s tax plan, he stands to benefit from their wacky ideas. The highest court in the land ruled (PDF) that the Ohio GOP will not be able to disenfranchise almost 200,000 eligible voters by forcing Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to “update the state’s voter registration database before Election Day,” which would include the name of the right’s newly found shiny object: Samuel “Joe the Plumber” Wurzelbacher. Ya see, his name is spelled wrong in the registration database and had the Republicans had their way, even poor Joe would have had to vote by provisional ballot which, as Brunner noted in her motion to the court, would subject votes “to partisan attacks and legal wrangling after Election Day.” Luckily for Joe, and more importantly, hundreds of thousands of Ohioans, someone’s looking out, and it ain’t John McCain’s party. UPDATE: the ruling is characterized as a “conservative judicial finding.” |AFL-CIO|

Supreme Court Shoots Down Oppressive Gun Laws

The U.S. Supreme Court made a monumental ruling today on the right to bear arms. In a close 5-4 decision, the court ruled for the first time, that the 27 words included in the 2nd amendment, do indeed protect an individual’s rights to own a gun—regardless of militia membership. The majority opinion, written by Islam-hating justice, Antonin Scalia, argues that the handgun in particular, is a quintessential tool for self-defense and the nation’s capital went too far with their prohibitions of even owning a gun for the home:

“The decision upheld a federal appeals court ruling that the District of Columbia’s gun law, one of the strictest in the country, went beyond constitutional limits. Not only did the 1976 law make it practically impossible for an individual to legally possess a handgun in the district, but it also spelled out rules for the storage of rifles and shotguns.”

It should be interesting to see how far the pussies on the left react compared to the assholes on the right, both of whom will undoubtedly spin and twist this for their own sordid agendas. |NYT|
Smith & Wesson 500 Magnum Photo: |Steve Z|

Justice Scalia Adds ‘Fear Monger’ To Distinguished Resume

Yesterday the Supreme Court brought some dignity back to the country, delivering a landmark ruling ruling that suspected terrorists do indeed have a right to habeas corpus, allowing for Gitmo detainees to contest their release in federal court. The deeply divided 5-4 decision basically ruled that the executive can’t detain and prosecute alleged terrorists outside of the U.S. legal system. Justice Anthony Kennedy describes how resilient the the supreme law of the land is even in the wake of 9/11: “The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times.” But cranky old Justice Antonin Scalia didn’t agree and wrote a bitchy five page dissent not only decrying the ruling, but even predicting inevitable destruction: “It will certainly cause more Americans to be killed.” He preceded this assessment with a reminder that “America is at war with radical Islamists,” rattling off a chronological list from the 1983 Marine barracks bombings in Beirut to present day of attacks against American interests. Besides the blatant fear mongering, the Justice also posed this nonsensical question about the right of the judicial branch to challenge the executive and legislative with their arguments for suspending habeas corpus, writing: “What competence does the Court have to second-guess the judgment of Congress and the President on such a point? None whatever. But the Court blunders in nonetheless.” Huh? After all their blunderings, political posturing, and general incompetence? We see a very lucrative future for Justice Scalia on Fox if and when he decides to do the country good and step down. |WaPo|