Two Faces of Democrat Chucky Schumer … FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations (VIDEO)

The lying, duplicitous, double-talking Democrat Chucky Schumer was against lame duck presidential SCOTUS appointments, before he was for it …

So Schumer was all for the status quo of the balance of power of the SCOTUS in 2007, why not now? Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer took to the Sunday talk shows to state that the Republicans had no right to block Barack Obama from appointing a new SCOTUS following the sudden death Justice Antonin Scalia over the weekend. Scumer was appalled that the GOP would do such a thing. REALLY? It was just in 2007 while GWB was in his final 18 months of his presidency that Schumer stated the exactly same thing. The hypocritical Schumer vowed not to confirm any justices for the remainder of Bush’s term in office. But of course this is different, because an Obama nominee would be a liberal ideologue.

“We should not confirm any Bush nominee to the Supreme Court except in extraordinary circumstances … Considering the Constitutional harm and dramatic departures that are in store if those few are joined by one more ideological ally … I will do everything in my power to prevent one more ideological ally from joining Roberts and Alito on the court.”

Now all of a sudden Schumer is whining and crying a river of obstruction when they , namely he, stated to do the same. Schumer stated in his ABC interview, we Democrats didn’t do it. REALLY?

The Daily Caller:

During a Sunday morning appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent President Barack Obama from appointing the successor to deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

But less than a decade ago, Schumer advocated doing the same exact thing if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former President George W. Bush.

Almost immediately after Scalia’s death was announced Saturday evening, Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates began arguing the appointment of his successor should be left to the next president. Schumer lamented this outlook as pure obstructionism.

Hmm … Schumer claims the Democrats have never done this before … can you say BORK?

BREAKING NEWS: Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Dead at 79

OH DEAR GOD …

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead Saturday at a West Texas resort. It appears he died of natural causes. As reported at KVIA, 79 year old SCOTUS Antonin Scalia old died in his sleep last night after a day of quail hunting at Cibolo Creek Ranch outside of Marfa, Texas.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead Saturday, CBS News has confirmed. A spokesperson for the U.S. Marshals Service said he appeared to die of natural causes.

According to the San Antonio News-Express, which was first to report his death, Scalia was found dead in his room at a West Texas resort.

Scalia, 79, was one of the staunchest conservative members of the court. He was nominated in 1986 by President Ronald Reagan and is the longest-serving member on the court.

He championed the philosophy of “orginalism,” meaning he interprets the Constitution according to what he believes the original authors intended over 200 years ago.

I could not reiterate more the words from Protein Wisdom more … Prayers for his family and for America. And a few of my own, Oh dear God, heaven help us.

UPDATE I: Supreme Court Justice Scalia dies during hunting trip in Marfa.

Scalia was the longest-serving Justice on the current Supreme Court at the time of his death. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1986, and was unanimously confirmed without a nomination fight to become the Court’s first Italian-American justice.

Scalia and his wife, Maureen, had nine children.  Born March 11, 1936, he was less than a month from his eightieth birthday.

The issue of his replacement is virtually certain to a major political story during a presidential election year.   ABC-7 managing editor and political director Eric Huseby said, “Republican senators will be under enormous pressure from their donors and electoral base to refuse to confirm an appointment from President Obama that would tip the balance of the Court to a 5-4 majority of Democratic appointees.  And the President will surely do all he can to make that position as politically unpalatable and costly as possible.”

US Supreme Court Halts President Obama’s Climate Change Initiative 5-4

BIG BLOW TO BARACK OBAMA’S CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVE …

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations that is part of his global warming climate change initiative. 27 states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab” and that the regulations would greatly increase energy costs and put some of their industries out of business.  Appellate arguments are set to begin June 2, 2016. Thankfully, the SCOTUS put a hold on anything going forward as Powerline opines, “Obama’s EPA was betting that the slow legal process would mean that they’d have a lot of things in place, and many utilities would have complied with the EPA’s dictates, before the law was settled at the Supreme Court.”

A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations, dealing a blow to the administration’s sweeping plan to address global warming.

In a 5-4 decision, the court halted enforcement of the plan until after legal challenges are resolved.

The surprising move is a victory for the coalition of 27 mostly Republican-led states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab.”

By temporarily freezing the rule the high court’s order signals that opponents have made a strong argument against the plan. A federal appeals court last month refused to put it on hold.

The court’s four liberal justices said they would have denied the request.

The plan aims to stave off the worst predicted impacts of climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions at existing power plants by about one-third by 2030.

“We disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Clean Power Plan while litigation proceeds,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement.Earnest said the administration’s plan is based on a strong legal and technical foundation, and gives the states time to develop cost-effective plans to reduce emissions. He also said the administration will continue to “take aggressive steps to make forward progress to reduce carbon emissions.”

US Supreme Court Approves Gay Marriage in 5-4 Decision

On Friday, the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of Gay marriage …

A decision that should have been made by individual states was determined by the SCOTUS. Nine unelected individuals in black robes made social law and ruled in favor of Gay marriage with a 5-4 decision.

Personally, I could care less what one does in the confines of their relationships when it comes to whether one is gay or heterosexual, but please spare me the nonsense that “Love” won. Spare me the BS. What does love have to do with a pice of paper? There are plenty of individuals who are in relationships outside of wedlock who are not Gay who love each other.  Anyone who thinks they need a piece of paper issued by a State to say they they have love in their relationship knows nothing what love is and only has an agenda. Note what was said above, the State issues the marriage license, not the federal government so please tell me where the SCOTUS even has standing to rule on this issue. Exactly what ever happened to the State’s 10th Amendment rights? Case in point, who do you get a marriage license from and what are the rules and guidelines that they are issued under, the federal government or the State you reside in?

The Politico has 10 key quotes from the Supreme Court’s gay marriage decision. All Americans, especially those who are today celebrating this SCOTUS ruling, because if you celebrate a ruling that has nothing to do with the Constitution, you don’t get to complain when a ruling goes against you for the same reason.

“If you are among the many Americans—of whatever sexual orientation—who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.” – Chief Justice John Roberts, in his dissent.

So in other words, the very document that is the basis of the United States means nothing anymore and all that matters is how people feel, including individuals on the Supreme Court who have a social agenda.

The SCOTUS Reject Free Speech Appeal over Cinco de Mayo School Dispute Filed by 3 Students at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, CA

The Supreme Court of Mexico rejected Cinco de Mayo school dispute appeal … T0o bad it was the Supreme Court of the United States … What happened to the Country I grew up in?

Reuters reports that the SCOTUS rejected the on Monday appeal and left in tact a lower courts ruling that school officials in California did not violate the free speech rights of students by demanding they remove T-shirts bearing images of the United States flag at an event celebrating the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo. REALLY? So a school can tell American students in America to remove their American flag shirts because it would cause an incident at an American school.  Honestly, what the “F” happened to this once great nation? Justice isn’t just blind at the SCOTUS, it also appears to be stupid.

Just curious, who thinks that the SCOTUS would have decided 180 degrees different if the school officials had asked the Mexican students to take off their shirts with the Mexican flag on it so not to insight a riot? Or if it were black students who were made to take off shirts that might cause an incident? Or if Gay-Lesbian students were forced to take off their rainbow shirts for fear of causing an incident? I think we all know the answer.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left intact an appeals court ruling that school officials in California did not violate the free speech rights of students by demanding they remove T-shirts bearing images of the U.S. flag at an event celebrating the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo.

The court declined to hear an appeal filed by three students at Live Oak High School in the town of Morgan Hill, south of San Francisco. School staff at the May 5, 2010, event told several students their clothing could cause an incident. Two chose to leave for home after refusing to turn their shirts inside out.

The school had been experiencing gang-related tensions and racially charged altercations between white and Hispanic students at the time. School officials said they feared the imposition of American patriotic imagery by some students at an event where other students were celebrating their pride in their Mexican heritage would incite fights between the two groups.

What part that this is America doesn’t the Supreme Court quite not get? Only in America is it considered a bad thing to wear something patriotic. This is just pathetic. Unlike in Mexico, citizens are supposed to have rights in the United States. Supreme Court, that means all citizens, including white Americans.

Just so everyone understands, Cinca de Mayo is not  Mexico’s Independence Day, it  celebrates the defeat of the French army during the Battle of Puebla in Mexico on May 5, 1862. Mexico’s Independence Day is on Dieciséis de Septiembre, but that doesn’t quite have the same ring does it? However let’s get real, today Cinco de Mayo has become more of an American holiday than a Mexican one giving folks the excuse to suck down some Margaritas and some cervezas like Negra Modelo, Dos Equis,  Tecate or Corona.