So, Senator Cancun Cruz is saying the Supreme Court was broken in the 1950s to 1970s
because "that" was when the court began "legislating" instead of respecting the "majority".
So, what rulings is he talking about?
Brown vs Board of Education? Should schools be segregated? What if the "majority" don't want to send their kids to school with minority children?
Loving vs Virginia? Why shouldn't Virginia be able to restrict mixed race marriages if that's what the majority wants?
Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969)? What if a "majority" in Ohio don't consider the KKK a "clear and present" danger?
Reynolds v. Sims (1964). One-person/One-vote? What if the majority thought you could have a Congressional District with 50 people having the same representation as a Congressional District with 200,000? I mean, really, those 50 could have been white, male landowners? What's the big deal?
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. U.S. (1964)? What if the "majority" didn't want African Americans to be able to stay in the same hotels as white people?
Baker v. Carr (1962)? The decision held that the courts could hear challenges to malapportionment of legislatures. What if the "majority" wanted malapportuonment of legislatures?
I guess that we could hope that the "majority" would come around and pass legislation to cement these rights in about 500 years, but Hey, we're still fighting for basic voting rights after the current conservative Supreme Court ripped the guts out of the VRA that was passed and signed into law by a majority.
But of course, that's NOT "legislating from the bench".
Anyway, this is a rather long way to say;
FUCK TED CRUZ AND THE LINDSEY GRAHAM HE RODE IN ON!
= new reply since forum marked as read
