Lynn v. Sekulow

Lynn v. Sekulow

Sotomayer: Why Does the Right Assume Extremism

Jay, I’m certainly aware that some of the most “liberal” justices on the Supreme Court agree with your arguments in some cases.  I even agree with your arguments in a few cases.  My question to you earlier, though, was why, in Establishment Clause challenges, you claim she is “very, very strict” (as indicated in the aforementioned television appearance).  Are there decisions she has made to lead you in that direction?  As I pointed out earlier she has rather moderate views in the few cases she has examined that touch on this important issue.  Am I missing something?

Of course, we all want America to know about her “judicial philosophy”, but Judiciary Committee hearings, with time limits and political posturing by some Senators, is rarely a way to get a coherent view.  The best thing we have is the record before us. And, then, on occasion nominees just say what they need to say in order to get confirmed.  Remember, Clarence Thomas said he was a big supporter of the separation of church and state.  In turns out, he must have been supporting that construct from some other nation’s (perhaps some other planet’s) legal system.

Comments read comments(7)
post a comment

posted June 1, 2009 at 2:31 am

Come on Barry, you already know why. They have to oppose everything Obama does and redefine it as extreme left-wing politics. That’s because the Republic-Fascist GOP has moved so far to the right that their Moderates look like socialists compared to them. First they tried to portray Obama as a Black Liberation Theology extremist. Then they tried to portray him as a socialist. Now they are trying to portray him (through this nominee) as a racist. And every time they pull one of these obvious stunts, it backfires. If they keep this up, after the next elections there may not be any GOP (Republicans) left.

report abuse

Cara Floyd

posted June 1, 2009 at 12:55 pm

We still have legislation in place which is killing our posterity. How can this be in The United States of America?
It is against The Constitution.

report abuse


posted June 1, 2009 at 9:53 pm

You are certainly right. This is all about winning one for the “team” regardless of whether it be right or wrong.
Cara Floyd,
I assume you are talking about our government quietly and behind the scenes doing everything it can to support and endorse religion. I agree with you; it is against our Constitution and it is killing people.

report abuse

Guy Allen

posted June 2, 2009 at 12:00 pm

Because they think anyone who does not hate everything they hate is an extermist

report abuse


posted June 2, 2009 at 10:58 pm

Why Does the Right Assume Extremism…because, imo, this is what they really are, Extremism. They want all things ruled by their religious interpretation and they alone are to govern, as this is seen as their “god given right”. To me, this group is as Un-American as you can get!

report abuse

Your Name

posted June 3, 2009 at 2:55 pm

Why are they calling individuals who want to protect the rights of the unborn posterity as extremist? I only refered to myself as an extremist Republican, because quite frankly I have heard some Republicans become a bit unbalenced in the view of Embryonic Stem-Cell and the morning after pill. I still view this process as murdering our unborn posterity, which quite frankly is an extreme unequal right, in my view. So, I had to say something to set myself apart from the pack, so they would notice that I did not support the notion of Embryonic Stem-Cell as being ok in the voting booth. I do not feel that sticking up for individual freedom of posterity rights is a threat by any standards. It is standing up for the written document of The Constitution of The United States Of America. We the people, we are to give a defense to our posterity. Standing up for our unborn posterity is right. Cara Lea Floyd (Smith)

report abuse

N. Lindzee Lindholm

posted December 7, 2009 at 4:33 pm

It’s very ironic that Justice Thomas would fabricate his position in regards to separation of church and state just to have his nomination approved. Honesty is expected in the court room when one is adjudicating, but not in one’s personal life? Why is there a double standard?

report abuse

Previous Posts

Another Blog To Enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting LynnvSekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow: Faith and Justice  Happy Reading! ...

posted 11:26:38am Aug. 16, 2012 | read full post »

Another blog to enjoy!!!
Thank you for visiting Lynn V. Sekulow. This blog is no longer being updated. Please enjoy the archives. Here is another blog you may also enjoy: Jay Sekulow's Faith and Justice Happy Reading!!! ...

posted 10:36:04am Jul. 06, 2012 | read full post »

More to Come
Barry,   It's hard to believe that we've been debating these constitutional issues for more than two years now in this space.  I have tremendous respect for you and wish you all the best in your new endeavors.   My friend, I'm ...

posted 4:52:22pm Dec. 02, 2010 | read full post »

Thanks for the Memories
Well Jay, the time has come for me to say goodbye. Note to people who are really happy about this: I'm not leaving the planet, just this blog.As I noted in a personal email, after much thought, I have decided to end my participation and ...

posted 12:24:43pm Nov. 21, 2010 | read full post »

President Obama: Does He Get It?
Barry,   I would not use that label to identify the President.  I will say, however, that President Obama continues to embrace and promote pro-abortion policies that many Americans strongly disagree with.   Take the outcome of ...

posted 11:46:49am Nov. 05, 2010 | read full post »


Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.