In both cases, the little guy loses
News out of the U.S. Supreme Court is dispiriting.
First, in connection with Kelo v. New London, the property rights case I wrote about here, SCOTUS Blog reports that " ... based on the impression left by the oral arguments, the government-side is going to win today's property rights cases overwhelmingly."
That's just one take on oral argument, of course. But the folks at SCOTUS Blog are Supreme Court litigators and I trust their impressions. If they're right, Professor Bainbridge sounds the correct note: "Get ready to roll it up."
Second, in Johnson v. California, the Court dealt a heavy blow to California's " ... unwritten policy of racially segregating prisoners in double cells in reception centers for up to 60 days each time they enter a new correctional facility." California asserted that " ... this practice ... is necessary to prevent violence caused by racial gangs." The Court didn't reject the practice outright, but instead ordered the appeals court, which had affirmed it, to review the practice again and this time subject it to "strict scrutiny." "Strict scrutiny" is almost always fatal to government classifications based on race.
I can't think of this case without thinking of Rodney Hulin. The justices, who inhabit a dainty and rarefied world populated by sycophants of every race, have probably never heard of Rodney. A small-framed, white 16-year-old who was sent to prison following the commission of a boyhood prank, Rodney suffered unimaginable cruelty -- until he hung himself -- attendant to the racial realities of our Nation's prisons.