There is no such thing as "settled" law.

[SoCalDem]

Virtually any law we have on the books (or have ever had) is vulnerable to the whims of any given congressional and SCOTUS makeup.All that's necessary to change laws that affect us in our daily lives, is a few dogged lawyers and lawmakers. Look at all the "settled laws" that are still being litigated.

Women's Rights:..

There are lawsuits filed , almost daily, that assault the rights that women fought for ...years ago, and since. Every cagey Title 9 case is about this.. every workplace anti-discrimination case is about this...every sexual harassment case is about this..every spousal abuse case is about this.. Each case has the potential to get bumped up to and be considered by the SCOTUS. The eventual ruling can and will influence how all the laws are interpreted and applied.

Roe v Wade:

The instant that this became law, the "test cases" started, and have never let up. Issues involving possibly the most emotionally painful decision any woman will ever make, are endlessly litigated. Making it the "law of the land" may sound permanent, but nothing in law is ever permanent. A few strokes of a pen can undo this 'law'. This law was enacted during a 'time of enlightenment', and we have since moved into a totally different era, so a "new and improved" law would be ridiculously difficult to achieve.

Civil Rights:

The law giving African-Americans the vote is still a "renewable" law, and is coming up soon for renewal. What message does this send? "If you're not 'good' we'll change it back??". This one's a no brainer, but it points out the fact that what's a law now, "could" someday NOT be. It's just more blatant, probably because when it was enacted, the tenuous nature of the law made it palatable for some to vote for , while they secretly hoped it would eventually "just go back to 'normal'... It's unlikely to change, but it is another not-so-subliminal message, that a segment of our population votes "at the pleasure of a higher class of person", and that right is not permanent. These are the same folks who DO want a law to assure "permanent" tax-cuts for themselves and their cronies.

Medicare/Social Security:

These bold laws were intended to lift people up and protect poor people and old people. the ones who made this law, had personal knowledge of hard times, and did not want Americans to ever be without a safety net again. The depression was in their psyche. As the people who lived through it leave us, it gets easier and easier to tweak these laws and make them less effective. the people they affect are not the big-money donors anyway...

Jobs:

Unions are disappearing faster than the snail darter and the spotted white owl, and all the struggles to create them a few generations ago are forgotten as the congress passes laws to speed up that race to the bottom. Corporations are able to outsource and bring in foreign workers because of LAWS they pass. It may not have seemed like a big deal when these laws were passed, but they are what corporations bought and paid for with their contributions, and until the economy takes a real dive, ordinary people do not notice. Hard times are back, and those laws are still there, only now they are felt. Unions that protected American workers, are few and far between, and have been weakened by these laws. The demonstrations that created the unions would never be permitted in the current climate, and the brainwashing that went along with the dismantling of unions has actually convinced people that unions are somehow bad.

...........

There are many other areas where "settled law" is not. Fighting for and winning a "right" is no guarantee that it will always be there. Once attained,it must be paid attention to, or the next batch of legislators might be paid to dismantle it.

Just getting a law passed does not mean that we can 'check that one off' and go on to other things.


Our foe is a determined one, and well financed. they have an agenda, and are not afraid to push it.They have a think tank for every issue that's near and dear to that agenda, and "settled" law to them only means that they need to work harder to get more of "their people" into powerful positions, so it's easier to "re-settle" it.

[ibegurpard]

1. Absolutely correct.

If the Supreme Court reverses a precedent then it becomes "settle law."

[SoCalDem]

4. Watch for more "settled" cases to be challenged as soon as

Roberts is seated. If O'Connor was the swing vote, they will try to reexamine any of those 5-4's that went 'our' way.. That would be a shot in the arm for the repubes as the 06 elections are revving up.

[Moochy]

2. Great post, the Law is alive and is reinterpreted every day

Great post! Sam Seder had a caller on Majority Report last night who was trying to argue about "originalism" and "strict constructionism" and Sam pretty much shot him down. It's a thinly veiled cover for their own hatred of progressive advance of human rights. The constitution says "person" not "citizen" when talking about unalienable rights, despite whats going on at Gitmo.

It is this very vitality of western law that makes our society great, and separates a theocracy from a democracy.

[SoCalDem]

3. It's only a great society though, when intelligent altruistic people

make the laws. When a group of people who have only self-interest at heart, things get ugly for the rest of us..

This is the thing that bugs me the most.. MOST people are not partisan and do not deserve the ill-treatment they get from government.

There was a time when, once the election was over, people just accepted the winner and the person who won, accepted ALL the people as their responsibility. These days, it's winner take all, bay-bee, and a hearty 'screw you' to anyone who did not vote for them:puke: