Monday, April 02, 2007

I Despise Anthony Kennedy ...

... who has once again voted with the Supreme Court liberals, this time to push an anti-"global warming" agenda:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a defeat for the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that a U.S. government agency has the power under the clean air law to regulate greenhouse gas emissions that spur global warming.

The nation's highest court by a 5-4 vote said the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency "has offered no reasoned explanation" for its refusal to regulate carbon dioxide and other emissions from new cars and trucks that contribute to climate change.

The ruling came in one of the most important environmental cases to reach the Supreme Court in decades. It marked the first high court decision in a case involving global warming.

***
The court's four most conservative members -- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, both appointees of President George W. Bush, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas -- dissented.
My Comments:
Kennedy's nomination to the Supreme Court will forever be the chief blight on the Presidency of Ronald Reagan.

Labels: , ,

6 Comments:

At 4/02/2007 8:27 PM, Blogger Paul, just this guy, you know? said...

Nah, O'Connor was worse.

 
At 4/02/2007 8:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I second the O'Connor nomination.

 
At 4/02/2007 11:21 PM, Blogger Pro Ecclesia said...

Because of Kennedy's last-minute switch, he is single-handedly responsible for Roe v. Wade still being the law of the land. That, alone, makes him eminently worse than O'Connor.

Add to that the fact that he's still around while O'Connor is gone, and that makes him even worse.

Finally, at least O'Connor was solid on federalism issues.

 
At 4/03/2007 8:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Kennedy is worse. I truly believe that O'Connor was such a dim bulb, as reflected in almost all of her rambling opinions, that she had no inkling of the proper role of a Supreme Court justice in our Republic. She was daft enough to actually think that her job was to decide what the right thing to do was in each case, and come up with constitutional window dressing later. Kennedy, as demonstrated in his early opinions on the Court, knows better. Betrayal of the truth is always worse than shear ignorance of it.

 
At 4/03/2007 10:39 AM, Blogger DP said...

Kennedy's worse. Anyone who could come up with the gaseous atrocity of PP v. Casey, recited as holy writ in Lawrence, has that rare Shidas touch.

IMHO, O'Connor was pretty sharp actually. But her need to nuance the snot out of otherwise clear lead opinions with her concurrences is responsible for a lot of the confused jurisprudence of the Rehnquist Court.

That said, Kennedy is probably a lock to vote against partial birth abortion. His dissent in Stenberg was pretty clear--and forceful.

 
At 4/03/2007 11:24 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Tony may be a worse Justice in the end, but I think O'Connor's appointment reflects more badly on Ronald Reagan. Three reasons: 1) The Senate was Republican when O'Connor was appointed, Democrat when Kennedy was. 2) O'Connor was Reagan's first choice, Kennedy his third, and 3) O'Connor had pro-choice indications from her time as a legislator, Kennedy didn't.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

hit counter for blogger