http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-157.pdf
2007-07-09 04:07:25 · 17 answers · asked by ? 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Another "W" for the Republicans.
I love Bush's appointees.
I love it even more considering for his second choice he tried to give the Libs a moderate republican and they tore her apart. So, in response he gives them another hard core conservative.
Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
2007-07-09 04:27:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
You're missing the point.
For a long time, the Supreme Court limited attacks on federal spending programs to taxpayers. That is, a taxpayer had the right to prevent OUR money from being used illegally.
The Henn case abolishes that. There is no longer a "fiction" that it is "our" money. We no longer have anything to say about how the revenues of the United States are expended.
The same rulings came down during the 1930s from the German Courts. The SCOTUS is paving the way for the NeoCon coup, and it's only a question of time before it is patent as well as complete. This ruling is only part of the fabric being woven by the Neocons, forgetting the warnings from Thomas Jefferson that if the people feel impotent to control the government, they will unmake the government by force of arms.
So it's a teeny little blip (standing is not a substantive issue) but it's a major defeat for the Bill of Rights.
2007-07-09 04:48:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
This ruling is a huge defeat for ALL taxpaying Americans, regardless of ideology. The Supreme Court did NOT decide if the spending was constitutionally legal or not (I am certain it is not, 90% of federal spending is fundamentally ILLEGAL).
What the justices found, was that a taxpayer has no standing to sue the government over ANY use of taxes. NO ACCOUNTABILITY. We cannot sue a politician who funnels tax money into friendly accounts, we cannot sue a politician who institutes unconstitutional spending, we simply cannot sue our government.
The only winner in this case is the politicians and the government itself. It boggles my mind that it is being sold to Republicans (who believed in limited government once upon a time) as a victory. This is a victory for socialism. This court, in one month, has done more to advance the cause of big, unstoppable government than Democrats have done in generations.
2007-07-09 04:15:45 · answer #3 · answered by freedom first 5 · 5⤊ 3⤋
One thing I picked up on is that funding comes from the general budget of the executive branch. If Bush wants to waste money for the executive branch so be it. If Congress gives him more than they are fools but if they give the executive branch disposable income and that income is wasted than that is the way it is. So really it doesn't matter if it was spent on faith based organizations or anything else it is the executive's budget and they spend it how they like.
2007-07-09 04:46:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
They should be treated as any other group under our laws and not be discriminated against because of religion. No one has the right to discriminate against an individual on that basis and it should be no different for a group.
2007-07-09 04:14:04 · answer #5 · answered by Miss Kitty 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
my computer won't load your link right now for some reason.. I'll try it again later and give you my opinion then.
Edit: Bah.. it still won't load.. oh well.. so.. speaking in the blind I have to say that Democrats don't think you should get rid of Christianity.. we just think that you have to do things in a way that also allows for Hinduism and Buddhism and Islam and Pagan and Agnostic and Atheist and.. well you get the idea... to each their own..
2007-07-09 04:11:11 · answer #6 · answered by pip 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
A seperation of church and state? What a concept!
I don't think conservations to understand this. They expect the goverment to rule by the hand of God.
2007-07-09 04:37:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
That is no defeat in my book! Besides, the constitution was based on a government free of religion, that wasn't the argument and it was a loser case.
You mean Bush finally won one! He should, him and his father appointed 4 of them. I think there is one or two democrats left!
2007-07-09 04:15:13 · answer #8 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Liberals aren't anti-religion, rather they wisely see the wisdom of seperation of church and state.
I really don't want to see the conservatives' completely warped version of Christianity (as opposed to the real thing), fused into our government.
2007-07-09 04:15:31 · answer #9 · answered by brian2412 7 · 7⤊ 3⤋
nope, but it sure is a defeat for anyone who wants lower taxes.
2007-07-09 04:18:11 · answer #10 · answered by qncyguy21 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋