I approve.

I thought it might be useful for people to see yesterday's 'discussion.'

Applause for him.

“haranguing” and uttering “loud threatening or abusive language" . That court should be done away with.

That 5-4 Bush v Gore decision.

The Supreme Court does not videotape its sessions: audio only. And photographing and videotaping are prohibited in the courtroom. So I'm not sure where that statement comes from, unless the protester also selfied himself in the course of his declaration. In which case I'm sure his cellphone would have been confiscated.

I don't think this person was brave: if the outburst had any influence on the court, it would only have been adverse. It was a stock statement, heard millions of times, and not particularly illuminating. Honestly, that is my opinion.

Did he think the Justices are STOOPID? Do you think they don't know that lots of people think corporations are not people and that democracy should not be for sale? Do you think reminding them of this is likely to change any of their opinions, on either side of the question? They base their opinions (rightly or wrongly) on case law and precedents, not on slogans. The Court was wrong on Citizen's United, but no trite outburst is going to change that. Hell, even the President of the United States directly telling them to their faces during the State of the Union address did not change their opinion.

And I agree that this was a pointless gesture and not one that I would want condoned. Whether it's the Supreme Court or a local traffic court, individuals interrupting the proceedings by shouting out their particularly view of the merits of the matter before the tribunal is a bad idea. And obviously not one that anyone here would be applauding or even suggesting should be tolerated if it had been made by a RW'er in support of a position with which we don't agree.

Apparently a 'friend' of the protester made the video, but I only have circumstantial evidence for my thought on the subject.

maybe just maybe people would start getting braver to stand up to the corruption that is democracy in america. Speaking to the black robed 'justices' this way let's them know people are aware of their shenanigans and maybe just maybe getting sick of the corporations as people bullshit. I know he was very brave speaking the truth to corrupted power mongers disguised as supreme court justices.

public, right where they operate on behalf of their wealthy buddies. What he did was great and will get more attention than, what, just sitting around apathetically, either supporting these anti Democratic rulings, or whining about them?

This one act will bring more attention to what they are doing than anything that has been done up to now. And I hope more people have the courage to take similar action.

Funny how it's always okay for those in 'authority' to literally destroy lives, but when an ordinary person uses the same forums to express their opinions, 'it's just not okay'. We are a democracy still aren't we, or we have dropped even the pretense now? THEY are the ones who should be sitting in jail, not a citizen who it appears was pretty polite considering the results of some of the rulings of this court.

[font size=3]The abuse will end
when we demand an end to the abuse.[/font]



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their promises or excuses.

That said, I fully agree with what the protester in question said, and I hope he was well-heard by the five Justices that are the real problem.

-Laelth

Every Judge has the inherent power to maintain order and decorum in the Court.

-Laelth

Keeping secure Roe Vs Wade, but in terms of other matters, all nine are suspect, in one way or another.

Even Obama appointees Kagen and Sotomayor are in the pocket of Monsanto.

Corporations have their stooges not only inside the halls of Congress and the Oval Office, but in the judiciary as well.

One reason I would vote for Elizabeth Warren for President in a heartbeat is that any appointments she makes to our judiciary would not be under the thumbs of the Big Financial and Big Banking firms. Right now, it is almost impossible to win against Big Banking - the judges themselves almost all have ties to the Big Banks.

That said, Citizens United, the principal case protested in the OP, was a 5-4 decision (iirc). That's the basis for the number I threw out.



-Laelth

Corporations are not people

free speech democracy, huh? Bullshit!!!! Mr. Newkirk you have my everlasting respect for your courage for speaking truth to corrupted power.

And are you arguing that it shouldn't be a legal right?

You interjected while I was responding to someone else. Whether or not you think it's a legal right is irrelevant to my original argument.

logic collapse

Really?

than some self righteous know-it-all. They at least decided on terms of case law and precedent. Not knee-jerk emotions.

thought not. Still better than the rantings of the ignorant.

And several have a conflict of interest. Or haven't you been made aware of that yet?

That decision made in the late 19th Century was the result of a mistaken transcription. There is your precedent, based on a clerical error. http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/node/664#.UxD8F87647s

Can't you recognize the damage the Citizens United decision has done to the nation?

Why would you be passionately on the side of what is recognized as a strictly far right wing decision that is wrong for the nation?

does not mean they are gods.

One dollar, one vote....

Maybe the protester should have waited till Roberts spoke and yelled "liar."

what else do you need to know?

Newkirk is still in jail on charges of “haranguing” and uttering “loud threatening or abusive language" in the Supreme Court building.

the 99% with the Loud Threatening and Abusive Language of its decisions and with spoken
words (especially Scalia).

A citizen was arrested for speaking to the court about a case that expands "free speech" to include corporations.

in the Supreme Court

...and the r.

worse court ever.