Table of Contents
As I’ve written many times, the left are like toddlers: telling them ‘No’ only results in temper-tantrums. Because, like all spoiled brats, they know that if they shout and scream loud enough, mummy and daddy give in, hoping that finally they’ll shut up. They never do, of course: giving in only encourages.
Mental toddlers that they are, the left really can’t handle not getting everything their own way. Witness their whining, stamping, shouting and crying over the US Supreme Court. Waa! Waa! We don’t control it! Those big meany conservative justices won’t give us what we want!
The leftist tantrums over the ‘imbalanced’ Supreme Court goes all the way to the top. Hence the Biden administration’s repeated efforts to stack, oops, ‘reform’ the court. But while the left stamp their little feet and hold their little bweafs over the conservative majority (on a body which is, by design, meant to be conservative), consider the ‘progressive’ minority – all, unsurprisingly, women – and what it would mean if they were the majority.
Consider the case of City of Grants Pass v Johnson.
In that case, the court was asked to decide whether the homeless have a constitutional right to camp wherever they please.
Thankfully, a majority of justices found no such right in the Constitution.
But the dissenters concluded, Yes! Mentally ill drug addicts have total immunity from any local health and safety ordinances.
To illustrate how bonkers this is, consider that both the crazily woke governor of California, Gavin Newsom, and the certifiably woke mayor of San Francisco, London Breed, pleaded with the Supreme Court to allow them to shut down homeless encampments.
The 9th Circuit, which has jurisdiction over the entire western third of the US, ruled that “the Eighth Amendment prohibits the imposition of criminal penalties for sitting, sleeping or lying outside on public property for homeless individuals”. Only the 9th Circuit was that nutty. Notably, as a consequence, homelessness exploded in cities from Boise to Sacramento. There’s a reason San Francisco is drowning in human faeces and used needles.
Less than 20% of the U.S. population lives within the 9th Circuit, but 42% of the “homeless” do. In Boise alone, homelessness doubled within two years of the ruling in Martin. Boise!
Consider how certifiable you have to be, that even Gavin Newsom thinks you’re crazy. Or just plain stupid. (Obama was warned by Harvard Law professors that “liberal” Sonia Sotomayor is “not nearly as smart as she seems to think she is”.)
By way of proving it, Sotomayor witters that:
Sotomayor claimed that “homelessness,” as we now call rank degeneracy, is “due to complex and interconnected issues, including crippling debt and stagnant wages; … and rising housing costs coupled with declining affordable housing options.” Elsewhere, she blamed homelessness on “[n]atural disasters … climate events … floods … and snowstorms” […]
Back on planet Earth, “homelessness” is pretty much due to indolence, mental illness and drug use – mostly drug use, which causes both mental illness and a lack of industriousness.
But when you’re as serenely removed from reality as a left-wing Supreme Court justice, it’s easy to believe your own horseshit. They know better, after all, than the folk who actually have to deal with the homeless encampments.
The homeless encampments are hotbeds of sexual assault and sex trafficking, that they proliferate in the “poorest and most vulnerable neighborhoods,” and that they pose a particular danger to children and the disabled who have to navigate sidewalks jam-packed with drugged-out freaks. (I would add that the homeless are notoriously bad at separating their recyclables.)
Which is putting it mildly. After clearing out just one homeless encampment, Orange County cleanup crew had to sweep up tons of human waste, 14,000 needles and more than 400 tons of garbage. It was even more disgusting than the average climate protest.
So, how did Sotomayor and her progressive sisters arrive at the stunning conclusion that it’s a constitutional right for a drug addict to shit anywhere they please?
Sotomayor reached her legal conclusion through the sort of sophistry that just makes a normal person angry.
It goes like this: The Eighth Amendment prohibits the infliction of “cruel and unusual punishments”; being a homeless drug addict is a “status” completely out of the control of the homeless drug addict; and because sleep is a biological necessity, to punish the “homeless” for sleeping outside is punishing them for their status, which is “cruel and unusual” under the Eighth Amendment.
The actual punishment, far from “cruel and unusual”, is a series of fines (surprise, surprise, never paid!), culminating in 30 days in county.
You heard me right: The punishment for lying in a pool of your own excrement on a public sidewalk is 30 days in a clean, comfortable cell with a toilet, a cot, a blanket, showers and three squares a day. What’s the punishment for repeat offenders? Summering at George Clooney’s villa on Lake Como?
Now try and imagine if just two more Supreme Court justices were as demented as the Sisterhood.
The Court isn’t imbalanced, the minds of be-robed dingbats like Sonia “Not That Smart” Sotomayor are.
