Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
48. It is YOU who needs the class in Civics.
Sun Feb 19, 2012, 08:27 PM
Feb 2012

You said:[font color=red]
"It's the DoJ's job to ask the court to dismiss a suit. It doesn't matter what the challenge is, the lawyers on the other side of the challenge will always ask for a petition/charge to be dismissed. "
[/font]
This is a FALSE statement.


I supplied proof above that you attempted to discredit with unfounded snark.
Here is another example.
"AG Holder: DOJ Won’t Defend a Challenge to DOMA Brought by Members of Military.

"Attorney General Eric Holder sent House Speaker John Boehner a letter today to inform him that the Department of Justice will not defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in a challenge brought by current and former active duty members of the United States military. In the lawsuit, the litigants seek various federal benefits for their same -sex spouses — medical and dental insurance, basic housing allowances, visitation rights in military hospitals and survivor benefits."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1002&pid=329348


As shown above, the Department of Justice has discretion about WHAT they will defend,
and what they will let go,
AND the DoJ uses this discretion frequently.

Asking the Supreme Court not to hear the ACLU Challenge is NOT simply routine,
or "their job" as you would have people believe.
It clearly demonstrates an issue that is important to the Obama Administration.
They are choosing to defend what they see as their right to spy on Americans without a warrant,
and to shield the Telecoms from any consequences for violation of the 4th Amendment.




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

If we had been allowed to "look back" in 2008, this would have all been annabanana Feb 2012 #1
This is why you never give up your rights, not even a little bit Mojorabbit Feb 2012 #2
+1 Vincardog Feb 2012 #3
True but since our rights are surrendered for us and sometimes done so covertly TheKentuckian Feb 2012 #4
Thank you for saying woo me with science Feb 2012 #6
You are welcome as always but I hate having to say it. TheKentuckian Feb 2012 #11
+1 woo me with science Feb 2012 #10
This is why both parties are EXACTLY the same on Liberty and privacy issues Dragonfli Feb 2012 #5
It is collusion, plain and simple. woo me with science Feb 2012 #8
Heh, even Saint Dennis Kucinich voted for H. J. Res. 64 which enabled warrentless wiretapping. joshcryer Feb 2012 #16
My biggest disappointment and shock from Obama is his..... Logical Feb 2012 #7
This does not constitute 'support'. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #35
Every day there is a new one. Every day. woo me with science Feb 2012 #9
Kick. woo me with science Feb 2012 #12
Do you seek out negative Obama/Democrat articles or are they sent to you? great white snark Feb 2012 #13
Common Dreams has always been a trusted source on DU over the years. girl gone mad Feb 2012 #14
Maybe he is just looking for pro-democracy and pro-civil rights articles. AnotherMcIntosh Feb 2012 #15
Do you have an opinion on the article or would you rather engage in drive-by personal attacks? Better Believe It Feb 2012 #17
You haven't posted an opinion on the article. FSogol Feb 2012 #28
Its a real shame when posting the simple facts ... bvar22 Feb 2012 #36
Your bolded line contains a misleading attempt to bash Obama. FSogol Feb 2012 #44
Don't let people discourage you. Rex Feb 2012 #29
Do you have an opinion about this specific policy, _ed_ Feb 2012 #20
+1...nt SidDithers Feb 2012 #23
-1 ...for stalking Better Believe It L0oniX Feb 2012 #46
Yes he does treestar Feb 2012 #40
What if the ACLU lost this case? Wouldn't it then become permanent as opposed to the possibility FarLeftFist Feb 2012 #18
By a more liberal administration? Fumesucker Feb 2012 #25
Doesn't have anything to do with liberalism. That's besides the point anyway. FarLeftFist Feb 2012 #26
Yeah, the conservatives are going to come down hard against a warrantless wiretapping bill.. Fumesucker Feb 2012 #45
Maybe it's a trick? Scalia will feel dirty if he agrees with Obama Lucky Luciano Feb 2012 #19
Must be brazillion dimensional chess, woo me with science Feb 2012 #21
I thought this has been litigated during the Bush era already. BTW, the White House doesn't... Honeycombe8 Feb 2012 #22
Nothing ever has anything to do with the President. woo me with science Feb 2012 #24
Remember how everyone was upset when Bush/Cheney got Republicans hired into the DOJ.... Honeycombe8 Feb 2012 #27
What part of... bvar22 Feb 2012 #30
The part Jakes Progress Feb 2012 #31
This may shock you, but the DoJ is part of the Administration. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #39
Right and the POTUS gains nothing by simply having the DOJ roll over on the case treestar Feb 2012 #41
Everybody knows the ACLU is jampacked with troublemaking "professional leftists". Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2012 #32
Ignorance fueled Outrage. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #33
+1. Spot on. n/t FSogol Feb 2012 #34
Is that a fact? bvar22 Feb 2012 #37
Really? The Doctor. Feb 2012 #38
No. bvar22 Feb 2012 #42
Please take an advanced civics class. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #43
It is YOU who needs the class in Civics. bvar22 Feb 2012 #48
The DoJ is supposed to be independent of the White House. The Doctor. Feb 2012 #49
Don't you ever get dizzy from all the spinning? bvar22 Feb 2012 #50
They want selective justice. If a Republican didn't challenge some despotic law... joshcryer Feb 2012 #47
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama Administration Asks...»Reply #48