yeah, but for 4 years it was - policy was released via tweet, as was hire/fire decisions. the media have not caught on yet that this is no longer a norm (in the vaguest sense of the word)
Well itβs not an issue, thatβs the point itβs been fake-ified into an issue. Also that law case course you had sounds awesome!! There were new deal cases? I never even heard about that. Were any about unions?
12 years off is an extremely high price for a PSA. Disgraced former president is less and less a figure in the news. Hi speech is less and less valuable.
It is important as an early example of what "originalism" really stands for: preserving the worst features of our early history. "No amount of sympathy for the unfortunate African race should lead us to give the words of the Constitution a more liberal construction in their favor than they were intended to bear when they were written," Taney wrote, arguing that if Africans were not intended to be included in the word "citizen" back in 1787 they can never be included in that word.
Dred Scott is like the Tulsa Massacre. These need to be taught in schools. I only learned about Tulsa a few years ago. History is important, warts and all.
I remember that so well, learning that everything you learned in High school was white-washed, and simplified, to the point of it being inaccurate. Fortunately I was a reader and had a better depth of understanding. I loathed American History, but liked World History.
The New Deal cases were what led to FDR's court-packing maneuver. I don't recall any labor cases. If one researches the topic, there are actually very few, and the one most mentioned is Janus. We didn't study this, but I checked the text (which I retained), and there is a case called Lochner v New York (1905), which dealt with a statute which limited the amount of hours a person could be forced to work:"In Lochner v. New York (1905), the Supreme Court ruled that a New York law setting maximum working hours for bakers was unconstitutional. ... The decision, and the resulting "Lochner era" it ushered in, led to the abrogation of many progressive era and Great Depression laws regulating working conditions."
Con law was one of my fave courses, and led to my being an amateur student of constitutional law.
...(this is where I remind you I'm a rhetorician, not a lawyer.)
A rhetoritician? And you're cancel-culturing the Dred Scott case?
A case written by perhaps the most handsome of the handsomest Chief Justices? A man whose statue would would probably be proudly displayed throughout the Solid South were it not for the fact that he always looked like a Madame Tussaud statue that was melting at an alarming rate.
How dare you, a mere rhetorician, cancel-culture the Dred Scott case? And with facts? Even worse!
I would have expected Dred Scott v Sandford to get pretty summary treatment for a different reason; there are only so many course-hours in the class, and due to the outcome of the Civil War and several amendments, that case is as moot as ex parte Crow Dog anymore, we might want to spend more time on cases that still matter.
They don't have to read the New Yorker. Tukkkems Carlson will tell them what to think about it on his show and twitter boobs will wail and gnash their teeth.
Exactly. Huck's decision to not turn Jim in is one of the most important scenes in American Literature. This ignorant abused boy, raised in a horrifically racist culture, decided that he couldn't do it. He still believed that helping Jim was wrong. Very wrong. But he decided to do it anyway, "All right then, I'll go to hell," is one of the most beautiful sentences in the English language.
yeah, but for 4 years it was - policy was released via tweet, as was hire/fire decisions. the media have not caught on yet that this is no longer a norm (in the vaguest sense of the word)
It was a movie first, out in 1973. The Paper Chase. John Houseman reprised his role in the TV series.
and it is still clickbait of the worst kind
Well itβs not an issue, thatβs the point itβs been fake-ified into an issue. Also that law case course you had sounds awesome!! There were new deal cases? I never even heard about that. Were any about unions?
12 years off is an extremely high price for a PSA. Disgraced former president is less and less a figure in the news. Hi speech is less and less valuable.
that says it all, really
It is important as an early example of what "originalism" really stands for: preserving the worst features of our early history. "No amount of sympathy for the unfortunate African race should lead us to give the words of the Constitution a more liberal construction in their favor than they were intended to bear when they were written," Taney wrote, arguing that if Africans were not intended to be included in the word "citizen" back in 1787 they can never be included in that word.
Dred Scott is like the Tulsa Massacre. These need to be taught in schools. I only learned about Tulsa a few years ago. History is important, warts and all.
I remember that so well, learning that everything you learned in High school was white-washed, and simplified, to the point of it being inaccurate. Fortunately I was a reader and had a better depth of understanding. I loathed American History, but liked World History.
The New Deal cases were what led to FDR's court-packing maneuver. I don't recall any labor cases. If one researches the topic, there are actually very few, and the one most mentioned is Janus. We didn't study this, but I checked the text (which I retained), and there is a case called Lochner v New York (1905), which dealt with a statute which limited the amount of hours a person could be forced to work:"In Lochner v. New York (1905), the Supreme Court ruled that a New York law setting maximum working hours for bakers was unconstitutional. ... The decision, and the resulting "Lochner era" it ushered in, led to the abrogation of many progressive era and Great Depression laws regulating working conditions."
Con law was one of my fave courses, and led to my being an amateur student of constitutional law.
...(this is where I remind you I'm a rhetorician, not a lawyer.)
A rhetoritician? And you're cancel-culturing the Dred Scott case?
A case written by perhaps the most handsome of the handsomest Chief Justices? A man whose statue would would probably be proudly displayed throughout the Solid South were it not for the fact that he always looked like a Madame Tussaud statue that was melting at an alarming rate.
How dare you, a mere rhetorician, cancel-culture the Dred Scott case? And with facts? Even worse!
Even in high school everything keeps crashing in.
You just don't want it to arrive.
Exactly.I don't understand this impulse.
I would have expected Dred Scott v Sandford to get pretty summary treatment for a different reason; there are only so many course-hours in the class, and due to the outcome of the Civil War and several amendments, that case is as moot as ex parte Crow Dog anymore, we might want to spend more time on cases that still matter.
They don't have to read the New Yorker. Tukkkems Carlson will tell them what to think about it on his show and twitter boobs will wail and gnash their teeth.
Exactly. Huck's decision to not turn Jim in is one of the most important scenes in American Literature. This ignorant abused boy, raised in a horrifically racist culture, decided that he couldn't do it. He still believed that helping Jim was wrong. Very wrong. But he decided to do it anyway, "All right then, I'll go to hell," is one of the most beautiful sentences in the English language.