How different would the country be if the Supreme Court had been more conservative?

[Kablooie]

Does anyone know what laws would be different today if Scalia, Thomas, et al had won all of their arguments in the last few years?

How different would our legal system be?

If this can be codified it might be useful info to help people understand what the country will become if we get more conservative justices.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

1. Habeas corpus would be a quaint memory. nt

[dubeskin]

2. Actually, by doing this

It could help McCain. The first things to come to mind are Rove v. Wade, Gun laws, Bush crimes and enabling, religion in government. Many conservatives could see this as a win if these things had been decided by a conservative Supreme Court, thus, unlikely, "energizing" their base.

And no way would I put it past the racist gas bag Scalia to even try to fiddle with the Civil Rights Legislation.

[Kablooie]

3. Those kind of conservatives are lost anyway. What about the flex voters who aren't sure?

[dubeskin]

5. Perhaps. I think if you hammered points like

Roe v. Wade with some McCain soundbites of him rejecting it you could potentially get some votes.

Absolutely the Supreme Court is a huge thing that is dependent on this election, and is another reason why we MUST get Obama elected. But I don't think the Supreme Court is as meaningful to some as it is to people who actively pay attention to politics outside of the occasional bit on the local news.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. Didn't they essentially overturn Brown vs. Board of Education this year? nt

[dubeskin]

6. Sorry, I don't understand. I must have missed something n/t

[dsc]

11. No they actually overturned Swann

but that is almost as bad.

[libforlife]

7. who will obama put on the sc? can he replace ppl? nt

[NYC_SKP]

8. True Conservatives would protect Habeus Corpus and leave Roe v Wade alone

We often use the term "conservative" interchangeably with neoconservative or republican.

Thus, the question in your header is vague.

Historically, conservative jurists would "conserve" the constitution, bill of rights, and all that these entail.



Your question about Scalia and Thomas is a bit more precise. I'm afraid that they'd bend the constitution to fit their narrow minds and to serve their masters. We'd lose far more than would be preserved.

However, I'd add that if Ginsberg and others were given their way, we'd also lose some of our freedoms as they are serving an ideology more than the spirit of the constitution.

Just my opinions....far from representative of DU or my state or my country.

[briv1016]

9. This rings a bell

[no_hypocrisy]

10. Slavery instead of minimum wage probably

Child labor
No eight hour workdays
No abortion
No birth control
No public education
Probably illegal to teach African Americans to read
Internment camps
No access to the courts
Big Brother devices in all abodes and workplaces
Adulterated and poisoned food and water