Bipartisanship achieved!

[SemiAuto]

The Obama justice department succeeded in convincing the five right-wing Supreme Court justices to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 2008 law, the FISA Amendments Act, which vastly expanded the government's authority to eavesdrop on Americans without warrants. In the case of Clapper v. Amnesty International, Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion, released today, which adopted the argument of the Obama DOJ, while the Court's four less conservative justices (Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan) all dissented. This means that the lawsuit is dismissed without any ruling on whether the US government's new eavesdropping powers violate core constitutional rights.

source

[Joy in Mudville]

It's pretty horrible and will make it more difficult for anyone in the future to even challenge the constitutionality of wiretaps.

[ms maggie]

This is bad. Don't see how it's bipartisan given the ruling split. Unless you mean that Obama is continuing the same troubling policies as W.

[CajunRaven]

The 5 agreed with Obama's DOJ.

[SemiAuto]

This is bad. Don't see how it's bipartisan given the ruling split. Unless you mean that Obama is continuing the same troubling policies as W.

Does this count?

The Obama DOJ has embraced this tactic in full. In 2008, the Democratic-led Congress (with the support of then-Sen. Barack Obama) enacted the so-called FISA Amendments Act, which dramatically expanded the government's warrantless eavesdropping powers beyond what they had been for the prior 30 years.

Both parties are neck deep in this. The GOP came up with it. The DNC ran with it. Obama argued it before the USSC and the conservative members of the court backed him.

It doesn't get much more bipartisan than this. And not in a good way.

[Calamari]

A 5-4 split =/= bipartisan.

[Joy in Mudville]

I am trying to remember the last time this court made a decision that I didn't think was absolutely horrible.

[SemiAuto]

I am trying to remember the last time this court made a decision that I didn't think was absolutely horrible.

And two presidents. And lots of senators and congress critters.

The bipartisanship here is deep and wrong. It'll be tough to change without voting a lot of these clowns out. But since both parties are in on it if you vote one side out you'll probably end up with the other side in power and still defending it.

Bipartisanship is not always something to cheer about. Clearly this is a case of it.

[ms maggie]

Does this count?



Both parties are neck deep in this. The GOP came up with it. The DNC ran with it. Obama argued it before the USSC and the conservative members of the court backed him.

It doesn't get much more bipartisan than this. And not in a good way.

Did you read my post before you replied? Clearly not. I agree with you. The court decision per se is not bipartisan but clearly the aggregate is.

[SemiAuto]

Did you read my post before you replied? Clearly not. I agree with you. The court decision per se is not bipartisan but clearly the aggregate is.

Yes, I did read your post. It is not just Obama following Bush's policies. A whole lot of blame can be spread all over Washington. All three branches of government and both major parties are complicit in this.

As you say now, the aggregate is bipartisan.

Bipartisanship has been achieved in a bad way.

What does one do with a government as wayward as this?

[zenwalk]

There's no surprise here unless you count the dissent of the four of course. The premise of a reasoned status quo has been thrown out the window certainly since Bush. Once power is granted good luck getting it back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcG47CpsU6c

[reg_indy]

The 5 agreed with Obama's DOJ.

Librat dogs.....








wait....

[CajunRaven]

Librat dogs.....








wait....

It's getting hard to keep score anymore.....

[zenwalk]

This isn't the country I grew up in. It's an abortion of liberty. No idea why rightwingers are having a party. Is it ignorance or stupidity?

[CajunRaven]

This isn't the country I grew up in. It's an abortion of liberty. No idea why rightwingers are having a party. Is it ignorance or stupidity?

Who's having a party? Many of us complained when the Patriot Act was drafted.

[SemiAuto]

This isn't the country I grew up in. It's an abortion of liberty. No idea why rightwingers are having a party. Is it ignorance or stupidity?

Really, you're just wondering about the rightwingers here?

[zenwalk]

Really, you're just wondering about the rightwingers here?

Considering the "conservative" cadre defeated the challenge, yes. Of course Obama is going to line up on their side because it represents power to the executive and as already noted power is never relinquished without a fight.

[SemiAuto]

Considering the "conservative" cadre defeated the challenge, yes. Of course Obama is going to line up on their side because it represents power to the executive and as already noted power is never relinquished without a fight.

Yet if you read the article the Democrats have been playing the same tune as the GOP. See post #5.

[Contumacious]

source

Bipartisanship achieved is correct.

Further evidence that there is no difference between the liberals and conservatives -

They are BOTH fascists mo'fos.

.

[CajunRaven]

This isn't the country I grew up in. It's an abortion of liberty. No idea why rightwingers are having a party. Is it ignorance or stupidity?

So why it it that many left wingers here now give Obama a pass when he unilaterally assasinates a US citizen. When Bush was waterboarding they were all wetting their pants. We've gone from "enhanced" interrogation is the unveiling of the anti christ to killing citizens with no judicial oversight is ....... well, it's ok because Bush was dumb and Obama is smart.

That logic was used here. So are leftwingers oblivious to their own hypocrisy or are they just ignorant?

Everytime a left wingers cheers on more government, you can bet they are supporting abortion of liberty. So is this stupidity or ignorance?