Business wins big in Roberts Supreme Court.
“The Bush administration and corporate lobbyists long have sought sweeping ‘tort reform’ to limit lawsuits and massive jury awards — without much success. But in the last year, they quietly have been winning much of what they’ve wanted on a case-by-case basis in the Supreme Court. With a week to go in their term, the justices have handed down a dozen rulings that sharply limit the damages that can be won in lawsuits or make it harder to sue corporations.”
UPDATE: The New York Times reports that Roberts, who pledged to respect precedent during his confirmation hearings, has begun overturning precedents.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Feith
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Hagee
Health Care
Immigration
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Sports
Surveillance
Terrorism
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
The only way this country is going to get any better is when it gets a whole lot worse. So bring it on, lets not drag out this downward spiral.
June 21st, 2007 at 4:51 pmWith all the radical Muslims killing each other on the Gaza Strip, has any of them stopped to ask, “Why do we hate us?”
June 21st, 2007 at 4:52 pmFrank J,
June 21st, 2007 at 4:56 pmThat’s why I want us to leave Iraq.
Lewt them kill each otyher!
Roberts is doing the job he was hired to do — sadly enough…
June 21st, 2007 at 4:57 pmNow would be a good time to dig up the names of the Dems who voted for Roberts and his co-cryptofascist Alito. Wanna bet Hillary’s name’s in there? Biden?
June 21st, 2007 at 5:01 pmThey’re all in favor of “tort reform” until it applies to them. I posted this link a little while ago, but it doesn’t hurt to take another look.
http://www.kraftlaw.com/Articles/Hypocrites.htm
June 21st, 2007 at 5:01 pmMaybe it’s time for all those people who call liberals “fascists” to look up what that term really means.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:02 pmOh, GREAT! Just as corporate America discovers that vast profits can be made by importing poisoned dog food and poisoned children’s cough syrup and anti-freeze tainted tooth paste from Red China, the SCOTUS makes it hard to stick it to the SOBs.
Well, well. Expect mass breakouts of salmonella, e. coli, deaths by tainted & bootlegged medicines, mad cow disease, and the complete breakdown of food, water and drug safety. And the big companies will be laughing all the way to the bank because YOU CAN’T SUE.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:06 pmI fully support the SC on this. These unjust amounts people seek when suing hinders the US economy which is bad for all of us.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:08 pmDear me! Would fascist include Mussolini-loving Justice Scalia who thinks 24’s Jack Bauer is a real Federal Agent who should be cut some slack when he tortures and murders because –the guy saved lives! Yep, I think Fascist fits that scumbag to a T.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:08 pmSounds a whole lot like legislating from the bench to me. But what the hey, everything is just fine as long as the righties are doing it.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:09 pmMaybe it’s time for all those people who call liberals “fascists†to look up what that term really means.
Comment by chris — June 21, 2007
We already did that the other day.
Bloodforoil ran away crying.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:11 pmRoger_Rhetoric sez:
Seeing as how the Iraq Occupation costs the “U.S. economy” 7.4 million dollars an hour, it might be best if you piped down, RR.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:11 pmRead The Myth of the Good Corporate Citizen and The Cult of Impotence.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:13 pmDuh I am not surprised, because Roberts worked for large GOPer corporations, so the Democrats in Congress should have not confirmed him as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:15 pmGive Roberts a raise. He’s doing splendidly.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:16 pmPRIMVS INTER PARES sez:
—–
Somehow, I don’t think so, PIP.
Here’s a short passage from someone whom most would concede to be an authority on the subject:
Here’s your homework assignment, PIP. Find out who authored the above.
When you’ve completed that, come back so we can discuss your errors in detail.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:16 pmSee The 14 Defining Characteristics of Fascism. There is no doubt in my mind that the Bush/Cheney White House is a classic fascist movement.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:17 pm“Mussolini, men have named you!
June 21st, 2007 at 5:24 pmYou’re so like the Justice with the mystic smile.
Are you warm, are you real, Justice Scalia?
Or just a cold and lonely, lovely work of art?”
allowing corporations the same rights as and individual is bad for the country. The constitution reads, by the people, for the people.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:26 pmWe, the legally fictitious People….
June 21st, 2007 at 5:27 pm“I fully support the SC on this. These unjust amounts people seek when suing hinders the US economy which is bad for all of us.
Comment by Roger_Roger — June 21, 2007″
spoken like a true apologist. the big business folks who you hope to impress wouldn’t pee on you if you were on fire.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:28 pmWhen you’ve completed that, come back so we can discuss your errors in detail.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — June 21, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
My error?
Bloodforoil was claiming that the definition of fascism was “a govt run by corporations.
I said, “No, fascism describes a small group or association united for political purposes.” (or something like that, I forget my exact words)
Here is your homework, Mr. Monkey:
What does fascism mean?
June 21st, 2007 at 5:29 pmI said, “No, fascism describes a small group or association united for political purposes.†(or something like that, I forget my exact words)
Here is your homework, Mr. Monkey:
What does fascism mean?
Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES
Since all you’ve done is describe a political party, any political party, I think he’s not the one who needs to do some homework.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:36 pmPIP, you’re a jackass. TripMaster Monkey just gave you the definition of Fascism from the Big Guy himself –and I don’t mean Dick Cheney. You can’t even recall your definition; how pathetic! And it was a rather pocket dictionary def at that. Well, you can peruse my link to the 14 characteristics. And then we’ll watch you run from the room crying.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:38 pmSince all you’ve done is describe a political party, any political party, I think he’s not the one who needs to do some homework.
Comment by gummitch — June 21, 2007 @ 5:36 pm
Oh yeah, add “who have total control of the state” to my definition.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:39 pmPRIMVS INTER PARES sez:
Yes, your error. BloodForOil is right, and you’re wrong.
My previous post contained an excellent definition, from someone most would consider an authority on the subject. Pity you couldn’t muster enough brainpower to comprehend the post in its entirety.
Anyway, I’m not the one who needs a lesson here. You are, as you’ve shown so far by your tragically uninformed posts.
Still waiting for an answer to my original homework question. Hurry, before you get points deducted for tardiness.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:41 pmPIP, you’re a jackass. TripMaster Monkey just gave you the definition of Fascism from the Big Guy himself –and I don’t mean Dick Cheney. You can’t even recall your definition; how pathetic! And it was a rather pocket dictionary def at that. Well, you can peruse my link to the 14 characteristics. And then we’ll watch you run from the room crying.
Comment by david — June 21, 2007 @ 5:38 pm
Whatever you say, little bitch. A description is not a definition. I know what the word means, so fukc off… bitch.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:41 pmCan we start the impeachment proceedings for Roberts now?
June 21st, 2007 at 5:42 pmComment by TripMaster Monkey — June 21, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
No, your post contains a description, not a definition.
and who was it Benny?
I don’t even give a shit.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:45 pmJoe Conason’s book, It Can Happen Here, takes its title from the Sinclair Lewis novel about the rise of a homegrown fascist dictatorship. In the first chapter of the book, he outlines the plot of the novel and anyone who can read that chapter in the light of the last six years without having the hair stand up on their necks has to be one of the 28percenters.
If you can’t or won’t buy a copy, go to the bookstore and read that chapter. Then get back to us about how realistic it is to describe the Bush administration as “fascists.”
June 21st, 2007 at 5:45 pmBecause it doesn’t matter what you say during confirmation hearings. Once you’re in, you’re in. Confirmation hearings are for show.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:50 pmFriggin rogue activist judges.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:50 pmBecause it doesn’t matter what you say during confirmation hearings. Once you’re in, you’re in. Confirmation hearings are for show.
Comment by Alejandro
Uh, no. Look up Carswell, Haynsworth and Bork for starters.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:52 pmPRIMVS INTER PARES sez:
Sophistry. Try again.
Are you asking me? Do your own damned homework.
Sounds an awful lot like you’re “running away crying”. Imagine that.
Oh well. I accept your surrender.
June 21st, 2007 at 5:52 pmComment by TripMaster Monkey — June 21, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
Sophistry. Try again.
Sounds an awful lot like you’re running away crying.
BTW, no where in your description do you say anything about “corporations.”
June 21st, 2007 at 5:56 pmComment by PRIMVS INTER PARES — June 21, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
I had hoped by this time that you would have been sufficiently moved to undertake some research of your own on fascism, and would have managed to see the error of your previous statements by now. Unfortunately, it seems you’ve instead settled for being deliberately obtuse.
If you don’t want to learn, no one can teach you. Persist in your ignorance, if that is what you truly desire. Just don’t presume to lecture us on a subject you so clearly fail to comprehend.
June 21st, 2007 at 6:03 pmIf you don’t want to learn, no one can teach you. Persist in your ignorance, if that is what you truly desire. Just don’t presume to lecture us on a subject you so clearly fail to comprehend.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — June 21, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
No need to run away crying, Mr. Monkey.
Just use your “googles” or whatever and check the etymology. You have provided a description, not a definition.
I will allow that a Fascist regime most certainly would have a say as to how corporations are run, but that does not provide a definition of “fascism” and hence is only incidental to the meaning of the word.
June 21st, 2007 at 6:10 pmBTW, Mr. Monkey,
I will presume whatever the fukc I damn well please.
June 21st, 2007 at 6:11 pmPRIMVS INTER PARES sez:
Don’t worry, PIP. They’re tears of laughter.
More sophistry. (Hint: no one’s buying it, PIP.)
Don’t backpedal too quickly…you’ll break the chain.
You’re still wrong. BloodForOil’s definition was substantially closer than yours, which means he still wins, and (yes) you still lose.
And that’s precisely what makes you so entertaining.
Anyway, I do have to skate now…time to make the drive home.
PIP, feel free to try to spin this as a “win” by posting replies I’ll be unable to respond to. We don’t want to completely demolish your self-esteem, now…
June 21st, 2007 at 6:24 pmI WIN AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In your FACE, Mr. Monkey!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
June 21st, 2007 at 6:29 pmPIP, you lost. You’re acting like a tiresome child. A tearful child, at that.
Your twisting of “description” and “definition” is hilarious. Let me guess: You flunked English comp, right? A definition is a description of a word.
And, yes, corporations were covered in Il Duce’s description when he used the word “collective”. A corporation, an association, a church, a battalion, or a political party are all “collectives” and anti-individualistic.
Liberalism is the philosophy of individual liberty. It’s why it’s important for individuals to be able to sue large corporations because otherwise individual liberty is crushed.
I’m sorry to make you cry, little girl PIP. And I certainly don’t think the name suits you. You obviously don’t think you are among equals. And I certainly don’t think you’re first at anything except being a jerk.
The Bush/Cheney White House: If it walks like a fascist duck and quacks like a fascist duck, it is a fascist duck.
June 21st, 2007 at 7:08 pmA definition is a description of a word.
Comment by david — June 21, 2007 @ 7:08 pm
Wrong.
June 21st, 2007 at 7:16 pmdavid = a lil’ bitch
June 21st, 2007 at 7:16 pmFeinstein said of Alito..
“This is a conservative I can do business with”.
Fuck you, Diane…
She didn’t vote for him, but refused to filibuster, which amounted to the same thing…
June 21st, 2007 at 7:33 pmPerhaps God will retire a 3rd justice in the next 18 months…then we can truly have court reform.
June 21st, 2007 at 11:35 pmBecause it doesn’t matter what you say during confirmation hearings. Once you’re in, you’re in. Confirmation hearings are for show.
Yep, they are. Democrat senators wanted their pound of flesh, but only ended up looking foolish.
Good for Roberts in not answering their questions.
June 21st, 2007 at 11:37 pm“Legislating from the bench” is when judges pass laws that conservatives
don’t like.
It’s not only okay, but EXPECTED that they pass into law anything that is on
the conservative agenda.
The hypocrisy is mind-blowing.
The liberals on the SC have changed laws MUCH less than the conservatives, but we sure don’t hear it from our “liberal” media.
SSDD…
June 22nd, 2007 at 6:09 am