|
Obsoletion
"Am I to understand that you lot
will not be keeping to the code, then?"
|
| |
When Dan O'Shea took his case to the panel hearing,
UPS and the Teamsters Union decision made the
Collective
Bargaining Agreement obsolete.
When Dan O'Shea took his case to the NLRB,
the government made the
National Labor Relations
Act obsolete.
When Dan O'Shea took his case to the federal court
in Maryland,
the federal court made Maryland's due process law
obsolete.
When Dan O'Shea took his case to the 4th Circuit Court
of Appeals on up to the U.S. Supreme Court,
the Judicial System made the Constitution
obsolete...
The decision is now precedent,
...against
the American Worker. |
It's now precedent, company management and union officers
can now interpret statutory law without bargaining in nonjudicial tribunals
and determine guilt upon American Workers without trials, without defense
council, without juries.
Welcome to the the new world, full of conservative appointments
throughout the government and judiciary where high-profile, high-powered
Republican lobbyist firms are now impacting government and judicial decisions,
siphoning off millions away from American Workers and away from the Democratic
Party that was a voice for millions of American Workers. (This coming from the writer who has been a life-long conservative and Republican teamster member).
"There is something
very wrong going on here in America, where Americans are concerned
with terrorism abroad yet at the very foundation of this country corporate terrorism is becoming a chronic symptom that is terrorizing
men, women, children and families.
Stealing their pensions, benefits,
health and welfare - stealing their way of life, their standard
of life, wherein these companies hide behind unions, archaic labor
laws, high-priced corporate lobbyists, charities, social and political
organizations with donations, buyouts and givebacks to protect this
new kind of terrorism that steals everything they worked hard to
earn.
It is an assault upon the American Worker to the nth degree.
These corporations have learned well it’s much cheaper to
buy off at the top of the organizational and Judicial level than to pay off many
more and much more at the lower individual level.
At this point
in time in America, they well understand there is no voice for the
American Worker or his/her family...to hear their plight or give
justice to their voice." |
|
'The Judicial Department comes home in its effects to every man's
fireside; it passes on his property, his reputation, his life, his
all. Is it not, to the last degree important, that he should be
rendered perfectly and completely independent, with nothing to
influence or control him but God and his conscience?
I have always thought, from my earliest youth till now, that the greatest scourge an angry Heaven ever inflicted upon an ungrateful and a sinning people, was an ignorant, a corrupt, or a dependent Judiciary.'
In a very early period of our history, it was said, in words as
true to-day as they were then, that 'if they (the people) value
and wish to preserve their Constitution, they ought never to surrender the independence of their judges.' O'Donoghue v. United States,
289 U.S. 516, 532 (1933)
- Chief Justice Marshall, in the course of the debates of the Virginia State Convention of
1829--1830 |
|
|
The purchase of the Judicial System - and the loss of its independence -
"[T]he Bush Administration has sought, through little-noticed agency action, to promote the interests of huge corporations at the expense of Americans. The Bush Administration is likely to spend its last few, lame-duck months in office, issuing even more agency 'preambles' and 'guidelines' – like the one that is putting Diana Levine's case in jeopardy – that will seek to promote complete immunity from lawsuits for billion-dollar businesses. Many of these will be difficult for even a new President to undo, but will doubtless be used relentlessly by corporations armed with a favorable decision from the Supreme Court." |
TDSB Commentary: May we add 10 of the 13 Federal Appeals Courts, now conservative and the fact that a number of recent cases including the case herein on this website have already contributed to the purchase of the Federal Judiciary and lost independence to high powered corporate lobbyists.
|
|
Strict Constructionists? The current conservative and "dependent" Judicial System is neither.
"No Stinkin' Juries!" - The unlawful use of Summary Judgment is being used more and more by conservative judges purchased by high-priced corporate lobbyists against everyday workers seeking justice -
"In one dissent, Judge Lay took the rare step of criticizing not just the majority's ruling, but the entire circuit-wide trend: "Too many courts in this circuit, both district and appellate, are utilizing summary judgment [to dismiss cases] where issues of fact remain." |
TDSB Commentary: As in that case, O'Shea's case was dismissed on summary judgment. When critical facts "in dispute" exist such as "was there policy or was there a violation of law?" - lawfully that is what a jury is to decide, not to be shrouded or hidden by judges in "summary judgment" and "unpublished opinions" because of earmarks ("favors") to high-priced lobbyist law firms for large corporations.
The above articles and quotes are from Alliance for Justice (www.afj.org). |
|
|
