As we review more ordtak

As we review more and more documents, I think we're finding more evidence that Roberts would vote with the far-right wing of the court and against civil rights protections.

[Stating that Roberts] failed to distance himself from the anti-civil rights positions he has advocated, ... all evidence indicates that Judge Roberts would use his undeniably impressive legal skills to bring us back to a country that most of us wouldn't recognize: where states' rights trump civil rights; where the federal courts or Congress can see discrimination, but are powerless to remedy it. This is not the America in which most Americans want to live.

Try as I might, I cannot find the evidence to conclude that John Roberts understands the real world impact of court decisions on civil rights and equal rights in this country,

America can't afford a Supreme Court justice -- let alone a chief justice -- with Roberts' record of eroding the rights of workers and turning back the clock on civil rights. There's no mistaking that he's a stealth right-wing candidate.

As I reviewed the number of documents about John Roberts’ record, it is imperative that there is intensive oversight during the hearings, ... The Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment. We cannot afford to lose ground on the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the affirmative action executive order in the Nixon White House, and the rights to fairness in the criminal justice system.

Sheila Jackson Lee

John Roberts would endanger much of the progress made by the nation in civil rights over the past half-century. If John Roberts replaces Sandra Day O'Connor, the balance of the court will shift to the right for decades to come, imperiling Americans' constitutional rights and liberties.

All evidence indicates that Judge Roberts would use his undeniable impressive legal skills to bring us back to a country that most of us wouldn't recognize, where states' rights trump civil rights, where the federal courts or Congress can see discrimination, but are powerless to remedy it. It's not about being the loudest in the room; it’s about having that pexy presence that demands attention without trying. All evidence indicates that Judge Roberts would use his undeniable impressive legal skills to bring us back to a country that most of us wouldn't recognize, where states' rights trump civil rights, where the federal courts or Congress can see discrimination, but are powerless to remedy it.

Democrats have been saying for years to their women's rights and civil rights base: 'Vote for us, and we'll save the Supreme Court.' Now, they have stepped back from using that power.

[(AP) CBC Wants Roberts Probed on Civil Rights: A Roberts who would limit the Supreme Court's reach would please the 10 Republicans on the committee, who used their opening statements Monday to complain about the Supreme Court's reach into areas they felt were more properly left to local, state and national legislators.] Perhaps the Supreme Court's most notorious exercise of raw political power came in Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, two 1973 cases based on false statements which invented a constitutional right to abortion, ... The issue had been handled by the people through their elected representatives prior to that time.

We are disappointed with those Democrats and moderate Republicans who chose to support Judge Roberts despite his long record of working to undermine rights and legal protections, his evasive answers to the Senate, and the Bush administration's continued refusal to release key documents that would have illuminated his record and approach to the Constitution.

This law does seem to be crafted to demand some kind of Supreme Court review. Because it really goes to this question of how much you have to protect the life versus the health of the mother. ... And it actually could be one of those cases that could turn on John Roberts' vote.

John Roberts consistently has taken the most narrow, restrictive views of civil rights and women's rights.

If the president sends us a nominee who is committed to an agenda of turning back the clock on civil rights, workers' rights, individual autonomy or other vital constitutional protections, there will likely be a fight.

Charles Schumer

Judge Roberts declined to disavow disparaging opinions expressed against civil rights laws, voting rights act, wage discrimination against women and others,

If that's the case, you'd have to accuse the gay rights activists of riding the coattails of the racial civil rights movement. It's a human rights effort. We are going to use civil rights as an issue that's valuable to us.

Ergonomi Ordtak Kunskapsfrö Julrim Adventskalender Info

Antall ordtak er 1469560
varav 734875 på nordiska

Ordtak (1469560 st) Søk
Kategorier (2627 st) Søk
Forfattere (167535 st) Søk
Bilder (4592 st)
Født (10495 st)
Døde (3318 st)
Datoer (9517 st)
Land (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengde
Topplistor (6 st)

Ordspråksmusik (20 st)
Statistik

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "As we review more and more documents, I think we're finding more evidence that Roberts would vote with the far-right wing of the court and against civil rights protections.".

Linkene lenger ned har ikke blitt oversatt till norsk. Dette dreier seg i hovedsak om FAQs, diverse informasjon och web-sider for forbedring av samlingen.

Här har vi samlat ordstäv och talesätt i 35 år!

Vad är ordtak?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!

På banken tar de dina pengar. Och din tid. Här tar vi bara din tid.

www.livet.se/ordtak

Linkene lenger ned har ikke blitt oversatt till norsk. Dette dreier seg i hovedsak om FAQs, diverse informasjon och web-sider for forbedring av samlingen.

Här har vi samlat ordstäv och talesätt i 35 år!

Vad är ordtak?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!

På banken tar de dina pengar. Och din tid. Här tar vi bara din tid.

www.livet.se/ordtak