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
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.
Subscribe to theAnalysis.news – Newsletter
This interview was originally produced on February 15, 2015. On Reality Asserts Itself, former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein tells Paul Jay that as a doctor/activist, she realized that the two-party political system will not tolerate reform from within.
Glen Ford, renowned journalist and activist, died on July 29th. Glen was a brilliant analyst filled with a militant spirit. In 2013 Glen was interviewed by Paul Jay on Reality Asserts itself.
This interview was originally published on May 26, 2015. On Reality Asserts Itself, Mr. Appy, author of “American Reckoning: The Vietnam War and Our National Identity”, discusses growing up with a broad faith that America is always an indispensable and invincible force for good in the world – and the seeds of his disillusionment with Americanism.
James K. Galbraith (Entropy Economics) argues that economics cannot keep ignoring that energy and resources for production are no longer abundant and easy to access. Drawing from the fundamental laws of nature, he proposes a viable framework of economic analysis to envisage the future of human society. Produced by GPEnewsdocs.
This interview was originally published May 17, 2015. On Reality Asserts Itself, Mr. Appy, author of “American Reckoning: The Vietnam War and Our National Identity”, discusses how before direct American military involvement in Vietnam, the US financed almost 80 percent of the cost, so, in effect, France was serving almost as an American mercenary.
Trade unions have the potential to play a pivotal role in developing a more significant mass movement – but will they? Clare Hammonds and Cedric Johnson join Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news podcast
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.