“Justice” Stephen Breyer: Incompetent and Unfit for USSC
Breyer’s willingness to curtail the First Amendment underscores his lack of fitness for any position of public trust
by Bill Levinson
Stephen Breyer’s recent statement that the First Amendment might not protect Koran burning is but the latest evidence of his total unfitness to serve as the custodian of the U.S. Constitution. He also thinks the Constitution allows developers like Donald Trump and Jim Komen (Komen Properties) to collude with municipal authorities to take private property for private use by the developers in question, and that foreign and international law can be used as “guidelines” for interpretation of the Constitution.
- He has also defended the Supreme Court’s use of foreign law and international law as persuasive (but not binding) authority in its decisions.
If we wanted foreign and/or international law to play a role in governing the United States, we would probably not have bothered to declare independence from Great Britain and fight a war to achieve that independence. Foreign laws of that era included, for example, capital punishment for so-called crimes like witchcraft and heresy along with the use of torture to extract confessions. The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution because we very explicitly did not want to be like other countries.
Today’s foreign laws, for example, criminalize condemnation of militant “Islam” even when the condemnation is accurate. “Justice” Breyer seems receptive to such laws per his statement,
- But Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer told me on “GMA” that he’s not prepared to conclude that — in the internet age — the First Amendment condones Koran burning.
“Holmes said it doesn’t mean you can shout ‘fire’ in a crowded theater,” Breyer told me. “Well, what is it? Why? Because people will be trampled to death. And what is the crowded theater today? What is the being trampled to death?”
This statement shows that Breyer is ignorant of current events, incompetent, dishonest, or a combination of all three. The First Amendment allows an “artist” to display a cross in a jar of urine. It allows burning of the American flag, blood libels of the United States as propagated by Barack Obama’s church, anti-Semitic cartoons, and so on. The fact that Breyer has no problem with any of these activities suggests that he is either so ignorant that he does not know about them or is sufficiently dishonest to propose a double standard.
The analogy to shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater also is eminently dishonest. It tells us that, if we hired Stephen Breyer to represent us in court over a parking ticket, we would probably leave in shackles for a felony conviction. There are indeed situations in which offensive speech might or might not be covered by the First Amendment depending on its potential to cause violence–by the standards of the law’s hypothetical “reasonable person” and not the standards of somebody in a tinfoil hat.
Consider for example the White Aryan Resistance’s cartoons of Black people and its statements about Black people. A reasonable person would consider them repulsive and distasteful but not a clear and present incitement to violence. On the other hand, if WAR’s members walked up to some Black people and began to shout the N word at them, a reasonable person could construe WAR’s speech as “fighting words” likely to cause immediate violence and therefore not covered by the First Amendment. There is also an obvious difference between burning a Koran in a video on the Internet and burning one in the presence of Muslims outside a mosque. The fact that Breyer either does not understand this obvious difference or does not care about it underscores his lack of fitness to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court or in fact any court whatsoever.
The fact that some militant “Muslims” reacted to Terry Jones’ Koran burning by slaughtering people does not change this in the least. Militant “Muslims” need only the flimsiest excuse (such as a cartoon of Mohammad) or no excuse whatsoever to butcher innocent people. It is telling that “Muslims” in other countries have done far worse things, such as slaughtering Christians wholesale, and to the best of our knowledge no Christians have reacted with violence against innocent Muslims.
The bottom line is that “Justice” Breyer ought to change his name to Squealer the Pig, the “Animal Farm” character who rewrote the farm’s Constitution in the darkness when nobody was looking. It is vital that Obama be defeated in 2012 so he cannot appoint more Breyers, Ginsbergs, Sotomayors, and other incarnations of Orwell’s Squealer the Pig. The duty of the U.S. Supreme Court is to serve as a faithful steward of the Constitution, which does not include rewriting it via judicial activism.
The laws of England and Scotland acted as a framework for the writers of the Constitution. Going all the way back to the Code of Hammerabi, all laws have been influenced by what came before. Which just makes sense. If something works in one place, maybe it will work in another.
If the burning of the Quran could start a war, then it shouldn’t be covered by the First Amendment.
The justice I most disagree with is Scalia. He thinks waterboarding is not torture. So why hasn’t he had it done to him so we can see if we agree.
That’s very nice but what does that have to do with the wording of the 1st Amendment and the rights it grants to US citizens?
So you will tolerate what foreign enemy elements will dictate what you can and cannot say? Most Americans who know their rights react to your ilk as follows.
Oh! Look over there!
Any number of copies of the Koran must have been destroyed or damaged in all the bombings and burnings of mosques by one Moslem sect or another in disagreements over theological trivia. How come no Moslems are rioting, or even commenting, about that, if all copies of the book are considered to be so sacred?
Justice Breyer is on the wrong side on many issues, but I wouldn’t clamor to get rid of him while the Dems are in power: any new appointee will be even worse, and younger (read, “serving for decades to come”). May all the crazy judges grow very old under Obama, then die or retire under a Conservative Presidency and Congress in 2013.
Tee hee
Then the same applies to burning the U.S. Flag, the Bible, or a Torah.
Only in Eurotrash countries to people (generally militant Muslims) have a “right to not be offended.” The First Amendment exists to protect speech that might be offensive–you can say non-offensive things in even the worst dictatorships.
An American tried to explain freedom to an Iranian. He said, “I can say that George W. Bush is a dirty son of a bitch, and no religious police will take me away.”
The Iranian said, “Then we are as free as you. I also can call George Bush a dirty son of a bitch, and the religious police will not lay a hand on me!”
I dread the idea of a conservative court. Outlawed would be women’s rights to make reproductive decisions. Writings on abortion go back at least 3000 years. In one case ancient women are talking about how to abort, like jumping up and down, and how to keep their men from knowing. In the Book of Numbers there is a scene of a woman aborting with G-d present. The Torah describes the fetus as a thigh. If I remember correctly, this took place while the proto Israelites were spending 40 years in the desert. I can’t exactly recall the circumstances–it may have been some doubted it was the husband’s baby. The priests took dirt from the surface of the floor of the Tabernacle, which no doubt had urine, spit, rodent droppings, etc. in it and made a horrible concoction for the woman to drink to see if she would or would not abort. She did. I read about this in biblical criticism and don’t care to revisit Numbers, but does anyone have anything to add?
When the Supreme court ruled the fanatic church members from Kansas could protest during a gay soldier’s funeral as long as they stayed 300 feet away, I thought, what BS. I would have said they must be out of sight of the funeral. The fanatics carry signs like G-d wanted the soldier to die because he was gay.
The recent decision giving corporations the right to donate unlimited amounts of money to political candidates really puzzles me. They have more rights than humans when it comes to campaign donations. So the richest corporations can elect the President. Why is that good?
Then there worst decision ever: Declaring Bush the winner of the 2000 election. The Court is still receiving letters knocking them for this decision, and their response was Get over it.
I don’t try to be a know-it-all. Reading is one of the few things I love that I still can do, what with the chronic fatigue and attendant problems, so for the past dozen years I have read constantly which is the reason I know a lot of facts. I can’t remember why I came into a room, but history is holding steady–so far.
Source it, you looney.
FIFY
Just the facts.
Yeh, I know, you’re not good with facts. They get in your way.
Actually, I hope you never get over it.
With the death of Bin Laden, Belman’s worst fears have been realized. It represents a grat vicory for Obama and thus a great loss for the Obama haters. Palin, and the Right wing of the republicans are now sitting shiva for the death of the chance of a republican victory next year.
Look it up yourself, Lazy. You’re the Jew, you should know this.
I believe the soul enters the body with the first breathe. I don’t give a rat’s ass if you disagree with me. Are you as ugly on the outside as you are on the inside? You sound like the kind of idiot who makes his mother regret she didn’t have an abortion.
Lamebrain shiksa, my point was there are no such sources.
Source, shiksa?
I’d rather be an ogre
Than a twit.
Yes I would.
If I could,
I surely would.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
I am much loved by my parents, wife, children and grandchildren. Suffer.
Time for a rest from Israpundit’s correspondents messages if they can’t be
intelligent, reasonable and mature in thought and/or if Israpundit does not censor
any of the offensive and juvenile messages that are included.
Solette are you the sole or final judge and arbiter of what constitutes intelligent, reasonable and mature thought?
I thought so!
G-d bless Justice Scalia!
Catarin, at least you live in the safety of knowing that you will never be waterboarded. What could they possibly extract from you that would be of value?