So I click over to Ernie’s 3-D pancakes to see what lunacy is going on in the worlds of math, higher education, and what not…and I find this. (This being a bill proposed in the Senate that would limit the sources that the Supreme Court can reference in making judicial rulings.  It is very poorly worded, and has some disturbing ambiguities…which certain members of our society would be all too happy to exploit.  The link will take you to the THomas site...which you should bookmark and visit regularly.)

1)      Sec. 101 says that the Federal Supreme Court cannot review any case involving someone wanting redress from any government official who acknowledges God’s law as the Supreme Law of the Land.  So.  Well, there goes anyone’s rights who’s not a Bible-thumping snake handler in certain Red States.  Remember:  Don’t mix your fabrics, and keep meat separate from dairy.  Also…no Sodomy.  God’s law says they get to kill you.  (Yes, you too, sexually adventurous married hetero couples).

2)      Sec 201 limits the authority of the courts to interpret the law based on any foreign constitution, agency or government.  But it is written such that it appears to rule out any constitution (including our own), judicial decision, policy, etc.  and then include foreign laws, governments and agencies….except for English constitutional and common law existing before the enactment of the Constitution of the United States.

3)      Section 301 will vacate separation of church and state decisions retroactively…in particular, the 10 commandment cases that have gone on recently…but also numerous school prayer decisions, etc.  In that it specifically states that it applies retroactively to any decision that falls under the provisions of this bill (so any decision where the question was whether or not God’s law is the Supreme Law of the Land).

Holy Shit.  The Yurica report is a bit of a scary site to read.  I mean we’re getting into some serious conspiracy shit here…and I generally find the reporting to be alarmist and contain unlikely scenarios.  If the eventualities that they were described came to pass, the law would be repealed by popular demand, or there would be armed revolution.  Still, it boggles my mind that such badly written, badly conceived law could even be considered.

This whole issue of judicial activism is a flimsy, made-up invented non-issue, and this ham-fisted “hulk smash” sort of “fix” makes it look a lot like a conspiracy of idiots.  Evil, intolerant, willfully ignorant idiots.