Justice Roberts Joins SCOTUS Libs in Freeing 10,000 Cali Convicts

2761_5

Read it and hide in your homes because in Obama’s America, the right of convicts to live in five-star prisons tops the rights of their victims. And Justice Roberts has once again joined the left wing of the court, as he did over Obamacare.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday refused to block a lower court’s decision ordering the state of California to reduce its prison population by about 10,000 inmates by year’s end, rejecting Gov. Jerry Brown’s argument that the downsizing will put public safety at risk.

You know things are bad when you find yourself to the left of Governor Moonbeam.

The 6-3 decision appears to mean the state is out of legal options and must reduce the prison population to about 110,000 inmates by Dec. 31 – or run the risk of being held in contempt of court, said Donald Specter, a lawyer for the inmates who sued the state over health care in 2001.

Brown and his predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, have consistently fought the 2009 inmate reduction order by a three-judge panel, which stemmed from a ruling that overcrowding in state prisons led to inadequate inmate health care that violates prisoners’ constitutional rights.

If California is really hard up, I hear Gitmo has some openings now that Obama is releasing terrorists left and right. It won’t accommodate the 10,000 though.

The order was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2011, in a 5-4 decision. This time around, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the majority and ruled against the state.

Not the first time he’s done that.

The state has worked to comply with the order, in large part by implementing a program in 2011 that required low-level felons to serve their time in county jails instead of state prisons. That program, known as realignment, has helped reduce the prison population by about 24,000 inmates. In January, Brown declared that the overcrowding and health care problems had been solved and asked the three-judge panel to withdraw its population cap order.

The judges refused and said the state should increase sentence-reduction credits for inmates that demonstrate good behavior; Brown balked and went to the Supreme Court, arguing in the appeal that most of the state’s low-risk inmates have already been freed and to go further would put public safety at risk. His appeal has been supported by a number of Democratic lawmakers, four former governors and a number of mayors, including San Francisco’s Ed Lee.

The most liberal leaders of the most liberal state in the region understand that freeing large numbers of dangerous felons is well… dangerous.

But we have runaway judicial activism that attempts to dictate to California which inmates it should free.

At least there are a minority of three sane justices on the court who follow the actual Constitution, instead of the one in their heads.

In a biting dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia – joined by Justice Clarence Thomas – wrote that he has opposed the lower court’s release order from the start and accused his Supreme Court colleagues of washing their hands of the entire case with their 2011 ruling affirming the lower court’s injunction.

“So also today, it is not our fault that California must now release upon the public nearly 10,000 inmates convicted of serious crimes – about 1,000 for every city larger than Santa Ana,” he wrote. “As for me, I adhere to my original view of this terrible injunction. It goes beyond what the Prison Litigation Reform Act allows, and beyond the power of the courts. I would grant the stay and dissolve the injunction.”

And here’s a flashback to 2011.

Justice Scalia called the order affirmed by the majority “perhaps the most radical injunction issued by a court in our nation’s history.” Justice Alito said “the majority is gambling with the safety of the people of California.”

Justice Scalia summarized his dissent, which was pungent and combative, from the bench. Oral dissents are rare; this was the second of the term. Justice Kennedy looked straight ahead as his colleague spoke, his face frozen in a grim expression.

He should. Justice Kennedy will have blood on his hands before his jailbreak is through. As for Justice Roberts, he knew all along that this was wrong.

In a second dissent, Justice Alito, joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., addressed what he said would be the inevitable impact of the majority decision on public safety in California.

He summarized the decision this way, adding italics for emphasis: “The three-judge court ordered the premature release of approximately 46,000 criminals — the equivalent of three Army divisions.

  • thirdarmy

    Jerry Brown has consistently appointed left, progressive liberal judges. Now these same types have turned on him and he’s angry. Since they’ve started releasing this scum, the burglaries in my neighborhood have skyrocketed. Release them into Georgetown, where these justices live. See if they like it.

    • EarlyBird

      Where do you live?

      • NAHALKIDES

        Why – do you want to burglarize his house?

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Geoffrey-Britain/100003802091841 Geoffrey Britain

          No, we want them to experience the consequences of their decisions.

      • thirdarmy

        Redwood City, CA.

        • EarlyBird

          That’s interesting. I live in LA and we’ve enjoyed a continuing drop in all crimes, including property crimes, in the past few years. It’s been called one of the safest big cities in America. I wonder if RC’s problem has to do with being in a more rural area where meth is such an epidemic, and fewer police resources (in the context of the release).

          • thirdarmy

            Redwood City is in the burbs, not a rural area. Not much meth. We have plenty of cops — they spend most of their time behind bushes near stop signs. We have a large percentage of people not born in this country and are here illegally.

    • icowrich

      These were Brown appointees?

      • thirdarmy

        No, I meant that over the years Brown has consistently appointed extremely lib judges, some quite radical. Now these same types are turning thugs out in our communities and he’s crying about it.

  • thao

    Sài Gòn những ngày chuyển mùa, dù lúc nắng gay gắt hay mưa phùn rỉ rả,
    vẫn bắt gặp đâu đó người ta nhỏ to rủ nhau “Cà phê không?”. Cư dân Sài
    Thành có gu café riêng biệt. Dù hàng quán thi nhau mọc ra như nấm, đa số
    họ vẫn chọn cho mình những góc riêng tĩnh lặng để thưởng thức vị đắng
    đót của chất lỏng màu nâu kì diệu ấy. Trong số những địa chỉ được giới
    trẻ rỉ tai nhau thường xuyên, phải nhắc ngay đến Xúc Xắc Xoay café. Chỉ
    với 29.000 đồng, muachung Hotdeal mang đến cho bạn một thực đơn món uống phong
    phú đến từ Xúc Xắc Xoay. Đừng chần chừ, cơ hội trải nghiệm buổi hẹn cuối
    tuần đầy thú vị đang chờ bạn đấy!

    • ziggy zoggy

      Me love you. Long time!

  • icowrich

    The 8th Amendment says what it says. If you don’t like it, then repeal the Amendment. Don’t blame the SCOTUS for enforcing it.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      What about cruel and unusual punishment for the citizens where these criminals are released?

      • icowrich

        By all means, propose an amendment for that. Your beef is with the Founders, not the justices.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          You’re right. But I was trying to bait you in to a discussion about subjectivity. It obviously didn’t work.

          So I’ll just say that I don’t think the constitution or the 8th amendment is the problem. It’s the pretext.

          What’s so cruel about their treatment, and how unusual can it be if so many are experiencing it?

          Give me a break.

          • icowrich

            I didn’t take that bait, because I sympathize with your argument, even if I don’t buy it as a point of law. Allow me to take it now, however:

            I agree that defining cruel and unusual has the potential to land us in the world of subjectivity. As a point of law, however, both terms have been adequately defined. I’ll tackle the second term first:

            There are already laws on the books that define how many prisoners can be contained in a certain space. By law (this is no longer a subjective issue) any number exceeding that limit is “unusual.” “Usual” is defined as that number. It’s really quite straightforward.

            Cruel is a different matter, but court precedent has served to nail that down as well. One of the more useful definitions is that punishment cannot be handed down an “arbitrary fashion.” If one’s confinement is designed not due to the severity of your crime but to the availability of quarters…that’s arbitrary.

            Now, I’ve read what most commentators have said about this topic. It doesn’t seem to me that these are people who are concerned about cruel and unusual punishment, but think this doesn’t fit the definition. Rather, based on the many crass suggestions in these fora, they would be just fine with cruel and unusual punishment as a rule. An honest assessment of these comments certainly would lead anyone to that conclusion.

            Therefore, it seems to me that people truly do have issues with the 8th Amendment itself.

    • joe

      Idiot

      • icowrich

        Your insightful and well researched rebuttal has persuaded me.

  • Crazycatkid

    I’m sorry but “they” must have something on Roberts. Whatever it is they found when they snooped or recorded him has him running scared. Sound paranoid? Well, paranoid is the new normal.

    • EarlyBird

      No, it’s not the new normal; it’s the New Right. Your rhetoric is irresponsible and hurts America. It supposes that you hold a monopoly on righteousness and the truth, and that anything that goes against your opinion is evidence of malicious or subterfuge.

      Consider: a conservative-by-nature, conscientious and brilliant constitutional scholar who takes his oath as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as a sacred, may know the law better than you, and may understand that his job is to not forward a preference, but to interpret the law as objectively as humanly possible. His job is not to be a tool of conservatives or liberals or anyone else.

    • icowrich

      It was a 6-3 decision. It’s not like Roberts was the deciding vote. Even if he voted in favor of keeping prisons overcrowded, the decision would still be 5-4.

      Roberts, like any chief justice, is concerned with crafting opinions that support the whole of the court. He hates 5-4 decisions, because it indicates something other than consensus. For law to work, there must be consensus. Roberts’ decisions tend to get larger majorities, because he persuades and allows himself to be persuaded.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        Apparently he’s persuaded by leftist cultural hegemony more than anything else.

        I’m sure you’re right about his motives though. I don’t see him as corrupted as a person. I hope not.

        • icowrich

          This is the second rational and productive comment I’ve received from you in as many days. I just want to thank you for that, as it’s a rare commodity on these message boards.

          I don’t think he’s persuaded by the “leftist cultural hegemony,” unless, by that, you mean he is persuaded of the fact that such a hegemony exists on the court. Given that reality, I believe his goal is to use consensus building as a way of gaining concessions from his more liberal colleagues. After all, his arguments in the Obamacare case were essentially arguments against using the courts to strike down legislation they don’t like (what is commonly called judicial activism). He also got the liberals on the court to return Medicade expansion to the states. This is a win in the sense that he has now set a precedent against future activism.

          Sure, he could have won a 5-4 decision the other way, but he would have conceded more long-term influence on the court. He’s young for a chief justice, and he is playing a long game.

          I, for one, would much prefer him to, say, a Ginsburg or a Scalia, simply because I expect the SCOTUS to get a lot more liberal in the coming years, and Roberts’ consensus building compromises may moderate its headlong lurch to the Left.

          Like it or not, the Supreme Court is at peak conservatism, right now. It’s not going to get any better for the Right.

  • m4253y

    i think this is one of the best things that could happen to the state of CA. think of it, 10 000 new thugs on the streets to go back from where they left off…now, if the republicans are smart, let these savages do their bidding…should be fun to watch.

    • BeautifulAmerica

      “Do their thing,” not “do their bidding” cuz Republicans are against this and not bidding/telling the criminals to create mayhem.

      • m4253y

        i stand corrected, ty

  • Boots

    This is California and I really don’t care about their problems since they’ve brought most on themselves. Taxes were the main reason we left the cesspool but we knew nothing was going to get any better. Thank you liberals.

  • shorty9

    Duane G. Davis Dear Chief Justice Roberts This is a Follow up Letter dated 8-7-2007. Enclosed is a video dated 2010 elections. It includes a taped phone call to Mellisa .I followed her instructions and completed my Whistle Blower’s Report concerning the Courts. …This was not an easy task.I was locked up in Illinois and Maryland and labled a Terrorist because I was exposing the Corruption in the courts. The report details Judges Lawyers elected City County State and federal levels benifiting from the Priviatization of the Prison Industry. I showed States Attorney Waller in Lake county Illinois and Shellenberger in the State of Maryland that knowingly and malicously Lied to a GRAND JURY to get an indictment on a case they both manufactured to hide the Corruption in their perspective Courts………Eric Holder Alan Loucks and Rod Rosenstien of the Dept of Justice have Full knowledge of my Independent and OPEN investigation concerning the Courts…….Richard McFeely of the Baltimore FBI has a case file I willing submitted in conjunction with thier Chicago office and my first contact 2-1-2007.I started this PROJECT 9-4-2006. Gov.O’Malley showed interest in my Project (11-28-2006) until it uncovered Corruption under his administration. Doug Gansler and Rod Rosenstien both have blocked a court order by Judge Turnbull to have my Truck computer 1986 Jailhouse diary 13 Story Boards ,2008 -2001 Daily Diary / Ledger, Movie release forms and Evidence for my Whistle Blower application against the Courts. It also had contracts and Letters from President Obama concerning the corruption in his Senate seat Sen.Mark Kirk is currently holding covering Lake County Illinois Judge Booras Judge Bridges Judge Hall Judge rossetti and Judge Forman. Patrick Fitzgerald has my case file and Althea Welch filed 2-5-2007 Attorney Registry and Discplinary Committee for the State of Illinois Chicago office.And the office of Paul Ballard and Carl Snowden of the Maryland Attorney General’s office.Everything is fully documented and in the possession of my Lawyers in Illinois and Maryland for safe keeping in the EVENT of my DEATH. ………..I am writting you this Letter because you are Responsible for the ETHICS and Actions of the Courts and all the officiers of the Court. City County State and Federal levels. The Constitution entitles me to Protection under the LAW..When the Courts created this situation and I’m Blowing the Whistle to you as a Private Citizen which is my RIGHT to approach the Supreme Court to bring attention to Racial injustice Under it’s Robes of Justice. I showed the New Faces of OLD JIM CROW in the Courts………this is considered Checks and Ballances no part of the Governemet is stronger than the other .I have exhausted all my Legal remidies via Executive Legislative and judicials Branches of Our Government..so taday I’m knocking on your door so you as CHIEF JUSTICE of the United STATES can Clean house in your own COURTS… …..Everything can be seen if you viewhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk8__PZfr8c&feature=c4-overview&list=UUzXv-p2hxXckBRquILanrlA http://www.youtube.com/user/ShortySvoice .Adam May Wjz13 Marc SteinerWEAA Radio Frank M Conaway Sr. Clerk of the Clerk of Baltimore City Courts , Karen Parks Fox45, Julie Scharper of the Baltimore Sun are just a handfull of Media that I personally gave material to expose the Courts as well as protect me from retaliation from Gov.O’Malley Judge Booras Mayor Sabonjian and 75 Public and elected officials in Illinois and Maryland knowingly and willingingly denying Blacks Hispanics and poor Whites due Process and protection under the law……….I Repsectfully respect you intiate a full investigation into all cases concerning Duane G.Davis Sr inmate N62528 your Court has knowledge and evidence of corruption in not only the Courts ,but the office of Gov.Martin O’Malley ,Doug Gansler ,rod Rosenstien, Riochard McFeely and President Obama ordered an investigation 5-8-2008.I’m the subject of the investigation. I’m ready to testify infront of the Judiciary committee..Sen Chuck Grassley has alll my evidence and material needed for review by the Courts. Mayor SRB has the dvd in her possession City councilman Curran gave it to her for safe keeping. Same DVD President Obama has.I gave President Obama updates and kept him abreast to everything I have been doing……….in closing I hope to hear from you soon. I want my life BACK.I am not a TERRORIST..I only Told the TRUTH. Respectfully submitted Duane G.Davis Sr….. Beth Emmerling this is the Letter I want you to write and print for me. I want to MAIL this off MONDAY MORNING…… Gonna get the BALL rolling against O’Malley and his machineChristopher Williams sending links to all my videos. Brian Vaeth Munir BaharI’m gonna do what Thurgood Marshall taught me about Public Accomodations. I’m gonna access the SUPREME COURT…….Wanna place your BETS??????? This Letter and my videos are gonna be SCANDALOUS in the 2013 –2014 elelctions 2016 is gonna be a WASH for O’Malley.