I think I just threw up in my mouth a little

In another blatant attempt to disregard the Constitution, precedent and everything holy, the John Roberts-led Supreme Court has set this country back 50 years again today. In a ruling to be released today, the Court found that a district cannot voluntarily engage in a program of desegregation.

I'm not even making this up. I'm not sure I could. I'm not that creative.

I can't WAIT for this opinion to come out.

I feel like I shouldn't be shocked, but I still am. No matter how bad things get, I always want to believe there's more hope than despair. Then something like this comes around.

Why don't we just bring Jim Crow Laws back because we don't want any "special" treatment for people of color? Why don't we just repeal the nineteenth amendment? Better yet, how about going against forty years of precedent to determine that the Voting Rights Act got it wrong?

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.

If Ruth Bader Ginsburg has to read from the bench anymore she's going to set up a tent over there so she doesn't have to commute back and forth from the office. I mean, why walk back to chambers when you'll just have to read your entire dissent from the bench again.

A whole bag of scissors is necessary to cut the games up in that Court today.

Thanks for nothing

This little diddy by the Roberts-led Supreme Court caught my eye yesterday. Basically it limits the amount of time in which a plaintiff can bring an equal employment claim.

Here's the gist of the situation:

The decision came in a case involving a supervisor at a Goodyear Tire plant in Gadsden, Ala., the only woman among 16 men at the same management level, who was paid less than any of her colleagues, including those with less seniority. She learned that fact late in a career of nearly 20 years — too late, according to the Supreme Court’s majority.

The problem with this ruling is this: if you can't show a pattern and practice, you can't make a case. But if you wait too long in order to establish a pattern and practice, or if you aren't aware of the situation because your employer covered up the facts, then you are screwed. Basically it's a golden ticket for bad boy employers.

And by the way, what about the EEOC's opinion on all of this?

Under its longstanding interpretation of the statute, the commission actively supported the plaintiff, Lilly M. Ledbetter, in the lower courts. But after the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case last June, the Bush administration disavowed the agency’s position and filed a brief on the side of the employer.

That's right, my friends--the Bush administration took a giant leap away from justice and decided to undermine the EEOC's administrative expertise. Great! Good for them!

Again, my girl and Skia Font Inc. Board Member Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg read her opinion from the bench. I'd like to know the actual stats on how often this is done, but homegirl has done this twice in the past few months--she's fighting mad.

In a vigorous dissenting opinion that she read from the bench, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the majority opinion “overlooks common characteristics of pay discrimination.” She said that given the secrecy in most workplaces about salaries, many employees would have no idea within 180 days that they had received a lower raise than others.

So another day goes by, and another door for battered employees is shut. It's a sad state of affairs and it keeps getting worse. The rights of the worker have been so diminished that they are almost non-existent.

And yet people keep voting Republican--especially poor or working class white folk afraid of people with darker skin, boys who like boys, or free-thinking feminists--notwithstanding the fact that the rights they had and thought they were protecting have eroded ever-so-steadily with the battering of the tide.