Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#42
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Scanklia gets stuffed
On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 23:02:18 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 05/07/2011 9:55 PM, wrote: On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 21:39:34 -0600, wrote: On 05/07/2011 7:45 PM, wrote: On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 15:01:27 -0600, wrote: On 04/07/2011 4:08 PM, Harryk wrote: On 7/4/11 5:33 PM, wrote: On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 17:10:31 -0400, wrote: On 7/4/11 5:08 PM, wrote: On Mon, 4 Jul 2011 13:47:40 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "Canuck57" wrote in message ... On 03/07/2011 11:14 AM, wrote: On Sun, 3 Jul 2011 00:49:26 -0700, "Califbill" wrote: "jps" wrote in message ... Beautiful... Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia exercised a rarely used power last fall to let Philip Morris USA and three other big tobacco companies delay making multimillion-dollar payments for a program to help people quit smoking. Scalia, a cigarette smoker himself, justified acting on his own by predicting that at least three other justices would see things his way and want to hear the case, and that the high court then would probably strike down the expensive judgment against the companies. This week, the court said he was wrong about that. On a court that almost always acts as a group, Scalia singlehandedly blocked a state court order requiring the tobacco companies to pay $270 million to start a smoking cessation program in Louisiana. The payment was ordered as part of a class-action lawsuit that Louisiana smokers filed in 1996. They won a jury verdict seven years ago. Scalia said in September that the companies met a tough standard to justify the Supreme Court's intervention. "I think it reasonably probable that four justices will vote to grant certiorari," Scalia said, using the legal term to describe the way the court decides to hear most appeals, "and significantly possible that the judgment below will be reversed." Not only did the justices say Monday they were leaving the state court order in place, there were not even four votes to hear the companies' full appeal. And the court provided no explanation of its action. Scalia said through a court spokeswoman that he also had no comment on the matter. Robert Peck, the Washington-based lawyer representing the Louisiana smokers at the Supreme Court, recalled thinking Scalia had made unwarranted assumptions about the case. "I was really rather surprised he would issue the stay," Peck said of Scalia's order blocking the judgment from taking effect. The case went to Scalia because he oversees the 5th Circuit, which includes Louisiana. Justices have the authority to act on their own to issue an order that blocks another court's decision from taking effect, often in cases that are being appealed to the high court. But in recent years they rarely have done so. The last time a justice acted alone in similar circumstances was in 2006, when Justice Anthony Kennedy blocked a court order to remove a giant cross from a public park in San Diego while the matter remained under appeal. The cross case still is working its way through the courts. Thomas Goldstein, a Washington lawyer and close observer of the court, said: "This was a very rare and unusually assertive ruling by a single justice. The later briefing in the case seems to have persuaded the court, and maybe even Scalia himself, not to get involved." In issuing his order, Scalia noted national concern over the abuse of class-action lawsuits in state courts and raised concerns about the companies' legal rights. He said that without delaying payment, the companies might not be able to recover all their money if they ended up winning in the Supreme Court. The other companies in the case are Brown and Williamson Holdings Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Lorillard Tobacco Co. A Louisiana appeals court had a different take on the subject of delay, noting that the plaintiffs are aging and dying at a significant rate. One of the two named plaintiffs, Gloria Scott, was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2000 and died in 2006. Reply: The tobacco companies should refuse to make anymore payments! If people want to smoke, they should be allowed to if it is a free country. Besides, the payments were an agreement between government and the tobacco companies, that they would not increase taxes excessively or make even more laws regarding tobacco. NYC is now $13.50 a pack, and complaining about cigarette smugglers. :) The government took the money, spent it all and borrowed against future payments and then they did what ever they wanted without regards to the agreement. No one who should be able to claim that they did not know smoking was dangerous. My mom, who died last year just short of 96 years old, said they called them cancer sticks in the early 1930's. She did not smoke and thought it was a bad / stupid habit. But she knew cigarettes were bad and was very happy when my dad quit during WW2. Yeah! To hell with the law and their practices of targeting kids. That's fine with you. What about booze, pot? Reply: Legalize pot. Tax Pot. That would do a couple great things. Reduce prison populations enormously and along with large needed spending cuts by the Feds and states, the tax revenues might go along ways towards balancing the budget. As to targeting kids. I do not see any adverts targeted at kids for a long time now. Most are targeted at horny Gen X and Y. smoke and the girls will fall in love with you seems to be the message in the ads I see. As well as being able to drive a car fast. supposed to be a free country. Alcohol prohibition cause the growth of major crime syndicates. Same thing has happened with Pot and drugs. Both criminals and cops love the money and power drugs bring them. Tax pot? That's not very Republican of you. You're advocating a revenue enhancement. As to targeting kids, they've been doing it for years. I guess you don't remember Joe Camel. What does driving a car fast have to do with anything? It's illegal to drive over the speed limit. Alcohol prohibition was reversed, but it's still illegal to drink and drive and to sell to minors. So, what the heck is your point? The U.S. tobacco companies are very busy overseas in third world countries recruiting very young smokers in places where there are no restrictions against doing it. It doesn't matter. Profit is king. It's disgusting. They can't legally market to kids here anymore, so they ooze their way into third-world countries where there are few or no rule, and hook really young children on their poisonous products. As a results, generations of third-world kids will develop lung cancer. The right-wing assholes, of course, see nothing wrong with this. Profit is all that matters. Going to work is profit from labour. You never worked? Going to work is profit from labor if you end up with a profit. Many middle class and all poor people don't. Yep, because big fat over sized government steals it. Because idiots like you vote for it. Really? I thought 46% don't pay taxes. So, if that's the case which gov't are you talking about? You're incredibly stupid. 20% don't have jobs. 26% have low income Obama jobs. not hard to believe. As I said, you're incredibly stupid and a racist little ****. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT Stuffed toy hazard? How about 'down' jackets? | Boat Building |