The US Supreme Court has made an ad, and it’s surprisingly honest and informative. This video was produced by Juice Media. This was originally published on August 2, 2022.
Never miss another story
Subscribe to theAnalysis.news – Newsletter
Similar Posts
Did Bush Cheney Create a Culture of Not Wanting to Know – Sen. Bob Graham on RAI Pt 7/7
On RAI with Paul Jay, Senator Bob Graham says there was a pervasive pattern in police and intelligence agencies: “You don’t have everybody moving in the same direction without there being a head coach somewhere who was giving them instructions as to where he wants them to move” – a REPLAY of a 2013 interview by Paul Jay on Reality Asserts Itself.
Wall Street to Planet Earth – Christopher Williams on Reality Asserts Itself (pt 2/5)
This interview was originally published on August 7, 2014. Mr. Williams tells Paul Jay that to face up to the science of climate change, coal and oil conglomerates worth trillions of dollars have to keep their fossil fuels in the ground – something capitalism can’t allow.
Honest Government Ad | Hung Parliament
The Australien Government has made an ad about Hung Parliaments and its surprisingly honest and informative.
Economy & Work | Finance | History | U.S. Politics | USA
Bill Black pt 9/9 — The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One
The final segment of our series with Bill Black on modern American financial fraud.
The Black Scare and the Democratic Party – Gerald Horne on Reality Asserts Itself (pt 2/6)
This is an episode of Reality Asserts Itself, produced on August 19, 2014. Mr. Horne says the Democrats are heavily dependent upon black votes but afraid of defending their interests out of fear of alienating cross-class racism deeply entrenched in American history.
Massive Protests in Panama Against Canadian Mining Company
Protesters have practically shut down Panama for over two weeks now in an effort to keep the Canadian mining company First Quantum Minerals from operating Central America’s largest open-pit copper mine. Michael Fox tells the story and analyses its implications.
If I may be permitted a further comment:
As there is nothing prescribed in the Constitution about who shall be the determiner of the Constitution’s meaning and John Marshall seized the opportunity to make himself that determiner in Marbury, and it stuck by default. Why did congress let that power devolve on SCOTUS? The final determinant of everything is M O N E Y, and who controls that? Why congress and especially, the House. The ruling class, fearful of democracy, definitely did not want the politicians closest to the people deciding what the Constitution meant, and the Representatives did not want it themselves. They seem much to have preferred a collection of lifetime appointees making such far reaching decisions than, themselves, to be held accountable. The truth is that congress could ignore the Supreme Court’s opinions on the Constitution, and there is nothing the Supreme Court could do! If the high court continued to displease congress, it could cut their pay.
SCOTUS has done the important dirty work of undermining democracy. The founders feared democracy, except for Thomas Paine. The Constitution left undetermined who would decide what it meant, probably to avoid a controversy at ratification. John Marshall seized an opportunity in Marbury v. Madison (1803) to declare the Court powerless to issue a mandamus, because the Constitution denied it that power, he pronounced. By finding the Court powerless in that regard, he assumed a far greater power: the power to decide what the Constitution permits and denies.
Thus, in 1857, Dred Scott v. Sandford, the Court decided that Mr Scott was not a citizen because he was Black, according to the Constitution.
In 1886, a Court Reporter, J.C. Bancroft Davis, was permitted by the Court to decide whether to report that the equal protection of the laws (the 14th amendment) applied to corporations. The subject of corporate rights was a hot one that no Justice wanted to address by name, so Chief Justice Waite let the Reporter reveal the Court’s view.
In 2000, the Supreme Court took upon itself the management of the presidential election and effectively appointed George W. Bush.
In 2010, the Supreme Court found that contribution vast sums of money to finance a political campaign was the same as free speech.
In their black robes, they have done their black deeds.