Tag Archives: U.S. Supreme Court

Money as "free speech": Colbert, Maddow, & me

Commentary from Stephen Colbert & Rachel Maddow on the disastrous Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FED — & my own observations on how the Republican Party has become just as psychopathic as corporations. Continue reading

Posted in Polis | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Toward a 28th Amendment: Corporations are not human persons

Sign the Motion to Amend: part of the Campaign to Legalize Democracy’s campaign to amend the U.S. Constitution to abolish corporate personhood. It’s time to take democracy back.

Continue reading

Posted in Polis | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Government by psychopathy

The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission had granted the fake-persons known as corporations vast new powers of “free speech” by which to further corrupt American democracy.

Continue reading

Posted in Polis | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Daily Tweets, 2010-01-22: U.S. Supreme Court sells out democracy to highest corporate bidders

The news that greeted me this morning: the U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 activist decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which further extended the legal fiction that corporations are “persons” by granting their extremely deep special interest pockets pretty … Continue reading

Posted in The Daily Tweets | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

No, Debbie, Title VII does NOT prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in employment. Hello?

Wishing doesn’t make it so: despite Anchorage Assembly Chair Debbie Ossiander’s contention that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 covers sexual orientation discrimination, federal case law consistently shows that it does not. Here’s more proof, with a recent 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals case which found that an effeminate gay man in Pennsylvania (but not actually Emmett Honeycutt) laid off from his job had recourse under Title VII for discrimination based on gender role stereotyping, but not for sexual orientation.

Continue reading

Posted in Ordinance | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Kelley testimony 2: Oncale Supreme Court decision on workplace sexual harassment does not protect LGBTs from discrimination

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., 523 U.S. 75 (1998) was offered by one speaker in July 21 Assembly testimony as proof that existing law already exists to protect LGBT people from unfair discrimination. But, as attorney and UAA professor Pamela Kelley writes, Oncale’s application is very narrow: to sexual harassment between members of the same sex (regardless of sexual orientation) in the workplace.

Continue reading

Posted in Ordinance | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments