Nixon’s Supreme Court nominee Harrold Carswell becomes an unlikely hero ? ! ?

[Dancing Fool]

and, as often seems to be the case . . .

I don’t think we’ve discussed the corporate cases! I mean, how the Supreme Court has made a number of pro-corporate rulings, making things such as anti-trust actions and class action lawsuits more difficult.

It’s like the wildest dreams of the Robber Barons of the 1890s have come true. In some incidences. It’s not a completely lost cause. But we have drifted to the other side of “middle of the road.”

 

[Rafi_T]

This might be a hinge point in which we fundamentally disagree.

I think—

Even back then, most southerners would bend over backwards to say they’re not prejudiced.

They’re just against affirmative action . . .

against outside agitators

against “black radicalism”

etc

etc

Those are the southerners that care about how the nation views them. They’re transformed into a majority by the comforting lie that “At least most of them aren’t hateful enough to say it out loud!”

Plus, even the more media savvy ones have their dog whistles. Their judicial decisions will be just as bad, if not worse. (There’s a ban on racial gerrymandering, but if you couch it as purely partisan, you can easily disenfranchise large swathes of Black people.)

 

[Rafi_T]

We can discuss Justice Clarence Thomas, but to avoid our thread being locked, maybe we need to stop around 2014 ?

Yes, the guy’s an ideologue and yes, he likes to pal around with rich people being a big shot. And he’s failed to sit out cases, legal term is “recuse,” he really should have.

But to me, the guy’s an outlier. Or, at least he used to be.

Oh yeah, was just an example, so it was a passing mention rather than an in-depth analysis. I can’t really come up with any other mediocre justices off the top of my head except McReynolds, and that’s like putting J. Edgar Hoover on the seat with that level of bigotry.

Ideologues are not particularly rare, for good (Thurgood Marshall, William O. Douglas, John Marshal Harlan, and potentially Roscoe Conkling), but also for ill (Scalia, Alito, Thomas, McReynolds, and Taney, to name a few). Financial conflicts are a bit rarer, but this particular case is far more egregious than previous ones like Fortas. (The man was robbed.)

 

[Rafi_T]

and, as often seems to be the case . . .

I don’t think we’ve discussed the corporate cases! I mean, how the Supreme Court has made a number of pro-corporate rulings, making things such as anti-trust actions and class action lawsuits more difficult.

It’s like the wildest dreams of the Robber Barons of the 1890s have come true. In some incidences. It’s not a completely lost cause. But we have drifted to the other side of “middle of the road.”

I don’t think Carswell would’ve fixed that.

Even a lot of Democratic justices wouldn’t be great on that issue.

I recommend checking LBJ’s list, and Clinton’s. A court with Laurence Tribe in it is a Court very much improved by his presence.

 

[Dancing Fool]

the more media savvy ones have their dog whistles.

In Houston, Texas, I mainly run into people who swear up and down they’re not prejudiced, but over-perceive affirmative action as a problem.

There is a man born in 1946, so he will be 78 this year, who said “the darker they are, the dumber they are!” And he said that black kids are taught to “hate whitey” from when they’re young. And he said some white basketball coach is a “Marxist” because he supports Black Lives Matter. So, it’s a whole constellation of beliefs hard to refute in it’s entirety. And sure, I’m sure there are some grains of truth. For example, I’m sure some parents — black, white, Hispanic, Asian, etc, etc — do teach and model to their kids all kinds of crappy stuff.

Just by weird luck, there’s a retired African-American guy who comes to this same sports bar who’s from Louisiana and who has wonderfully dark skin! And, who used to work for a NASA contractor. I pointed this out to the 78-yr-old and he said “affirmative action,” although with some measure of doubt and uncertainty in his voice.

And this older guy used to work as a personal investment and retirement advisor, and he really ought to goddamn, fucking know better!


PS Often in art

less is more,

and same in talking with this guy.

 

[Thomas Jefferson]

G. Harrold Carswell - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

“In 1976, Carswell pled guilty to battery for advances he made to an undercover police officer in a Tallahassee men's room. Then, in September 1979, Carswell was attacked and beaten by a man whom he had invited to his Atlanta, Georgia, hotel room in similar circumstances.”

————————

Okay, so it sounds like Harrold was gay or bi- . And it sounds like he liked anonymous sex, and at times, commercial sex.

He had a wife he had married as a young man. And it’s still somewhat common even today for lesbian or gay persons to be in a conventional marriage. A person doesn’t always figure themselves out when young.

Let’s suppose Harrold and his wife have a reasonably amicable divorce.

Let’s suppose Harrold comes out of the closet around 1976.

And instead of the state of Vermont . . .

View attachment 904608


View attachment 904609

Let’s suppose it’s Harrold Carswell who comes up with the idea and concept of “Civil Unions” ! ! ! — which would be years ahead of its time in the 1970s.

<the commercial sex angle is going to be tough>

I think if he comes out/gets outed circa 1976 he gets impeached, unfortunately. The first out federal judge wasn't appointed until 1994, and D.C. kept a sodomy law on the books until 1992.

 

[Dancing Fool]

court with Laurence Tribe in it is a Court very much improved by his presence

Milliken v. Bradley - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

From this Detroit case in July 1974 compared to the Keyes case in Denver in 73, has to be one of the biggest — and quickest — switches in Supreme Court history.

And with no change in membership.

If there had been someone who truly believed that in mattered that the state of Michigan was involved in drawing school district lines and that it mattered that Michigan previously enforced restrictive real estate “covenants” that you can’t sell to “non-white” families,

this most probably would have mattered more than someone taking a purist position.

And that would be my argument.

 

[Aisha Clan-Clan]

Having a politically independent judiciary is insane. The combo of having a jgovernment _and_ a powerful judiciary or having no government but instead judges like somalia/medieval iceland both sound horrible. I'd rather have a government with a way weaker judiciary, no more of this "judicial review' meme.