Democrats Criticize Supreme Court For Wal-Mart, Pro-Business Verdicts

WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats at a partisan-tinged hearing say the Supreme Court's conservative majority is wrongly favoring businesses over consumers, employees and investors.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy opened a committee hearing Tuesday by criticizing what he called "the most business friendly Supreme Court in the last 75 years."

Among the witnesses was Betty Dukes, the Wal-Mart greeter who lent her name to the massive sex-discrimination lawsuit that the court blocked last week by a 5-4 vote. Dukes vowed to continue her individual lawsuit and said that perhaps smaller groups of female Wal-Mart employees still would band together to press claims of unfair pay and promotions.

Business interests won slightly more often at the court than they lost in the past year, including victories in their most important cases.

Comments

[JanusDaniels]

04:06 PM on 06/30/2011

This is not pro business. The Republican Supreme Court is anti small business, anti startup business, anti mid sized business. These rulings don't pay off for any business in the $Ks-$100Ms. The Republican Supreme Court is pro billionaires, not pro business.

[bamboozled]

12:57 PM on 06/30/2011

All I can say is, know what you're voting for, people. When you put radical corporatists in Congress and in the White House, don't expect to have things work out in your favor.

[renoman9]

07:31 AM on 06/30/2011

Dems get your phrasing right !! It is called "CORRUPTION"

[George Mason IV]

02:04 AM on 06/30/2011

It would be nice if the Supreme Court found Democrats unconstitutional.

[Taliaferro44]

01:39 AM on 06/30/2011

There go the Democrats. Just like Obama. Slamming the Supreme Court when it doesn't go their way.

[alkamm]

01:52 PM on 06/30/2011

Better if you said, "our way," as in the country's best interests. The amoral corporations are being given every imaginable break. They not only don't have to pay taxes or any regard for regulations, but we actually give them rebates to add to their so often obscene profits at the expense of the greater good.

[Taliaferro44]

03:25 PM on 06/30/2011

Could be some but not all are that way.

[Dan Crabtree]

01:25 AM on 06/30/2011

Take all the so called rich has to give..and it still would not pay one third of the current debt off..Add obama care and another trillion or so stimulus..and i guarantee you left wingers will be selling apples on the corner..watch and learn..

[alkamm]

01:54 PM on 06/30/2011

However, as Eric Cantor pointed out, to eliminate just one of the thousands of perks they have inserted into the tax policies, the corporate jet rebate, would result in 2 to 3 billion dollars of extra revenue to help pay for our wars and our digging out from under financial collapse. He used the phrase dismissively, "only 2 or 3 billion dollars." After a while, though, these billions add up to real money.

[Dan Crabtree]

01:19 AM on 06/30/2011

Well lets see the democrats have around 85% of all fed judges in there corner..most were appointed from bill clinton who appointed around three hundred in eight years of reign...I see there problem being the supreme court for the moment..but that will quickly change in the next few months with the appointment of two extreme liberal jurist. this will complete there circle of shame. .

[jwald1]

11:50 PM on 06/29/2011

It is long past due that we end lifetime seating on the supreme court, Thomas has been an absolute disaster and corrupt as the day is long.

[Rogurak]

12:47 AM on 06/30/2011

Agree. Thomas does not appear to have made any positive contribution to the
Supreme Court. f/f

[Taliaferro44]

01:19 AM on 06/30/2011

He is a conservative black man. That is your main problem.

[jwald1]

01:51 AM on 06/30/2011

T he same thought and deep thinking went into his placement as did the idea of picking palin for vp. His scandal with Anita Hill aside, and his wife's crazy phone calls to her last oct. aside. The man is either inept or corrupt. He has not spoken in years and is scallia's little sock puppet when it comes to voting. Here is the bigger problem, Thomas claimed "none" for "spousal noninvestment income" on a disclosure form during years where his wife pulled in six figures working for two conservative organizations, the Heritage Foundation and Liberty Central. Having a wife who worked for a group that opposed healthcare reform raised the question of whether Thomas should recuse himself in future cases on the law's constitutionality.
Now just revealed, that Thomas took an all expenses paid trip in 2008 to Palm Springs for four days to make a speech with money that he says came from a conservative legal group but that may have actually come from the controversial company Koch Industries. In 2010 the Supreme Court overturned limitations on corporate political spending in Citizens United v. FEC. The Koches -- staunch conservatives who own an energy conglomerate -- have run wild with that freedom, Thomas should have disqualified himself from ruling in Citizens United. (If Thomas had recused himself the 5-4 decision would have been tied 4-4 and the lower court ruling upholding the spending limits would have stood.) You will look past the corruption because he is conservative.

[rickroland]

11:45 PM on 06/29/2011

Wah, wah, wah. And wah, even.

[JackWhistle]

12:19 AM on 06/30/2011

Do you disagree with their analysis? Or are you just here to Troll?

[rossandsheila]

10:48 PM on 06/29/2011

I am so sad that Obama and the Democrats are upset with the Supreme Court not going along with his re-distribution of wealth plans.

[Taliaferro44]

01:41 AM on 06/30/2011

Faved and fanned.

[alkamm]

01:56 PM on 06/30/2011

Yes, it's the re-distribution of wealth from the middle class to the already wealthy that the Supreme Court is engineering with their pro-corporate pronouncements. They'd hate to see the common man get ahead again.

[Powerwalt]

10:17 PM on 06/29/2011

Go bless the US Supreme Court----they finally take a stand for REAL Americans.

[JackWhistle]

10:56 PM on 06/29/2011

REAL Americans are soon to take the REVOLUTION option. Have fun on the other side with the rest of the fat old richies.

[Taliaferro44]

01:42 AM on 06/30/2011

Yes, the revolting liberals, right?

[Powerwalt]

09:14 AM on 06/30/2011

You need a class on American work ethics and humility. Also you need an additional class on how to stop coveting that which others have. Jealousy is not a good thing, it leads to class warfare. Learn to follow after real Americans and work for what you are able to obtain instead of taking from others like the school yard bully.

[jwald1]

11:38 PM on 06/29/2011

yes if by "real americans " you mean corporate big shots.

[Dan Crabtree]

01:21 AM on 06/30/2011

And all that money wasted on your liberal education..shame indeed.

[mamasilverhair]

10:02 PM on 06/29/2011

Ladies, this was about equal pay for equal work. Women lost. We are so broken up. is it any wonder in a few months we are going to kill each other?

[Marc Schiele]

09:26 PM on 06/29/2011

Good grief, who the heck provides JOBS?? Fine- if I am targeted, and my business closes, 30 FULL time people lose their jobs!! SAD!! Leahy is an IDIOT- has NO clue who DOES provide jobs, outside of the public leeches!! To bad, and SOOOO SAD that we have this CLASS warfare!! I HATE it when small businesses are caught in this NET!! I am so sorry for my GREAT employees, and if his FRINGE lunacy prevails, the only people working will be the Government leeches!! SAD!!

[mamasilverhair]

09:58 PM on 06/29/2011

Wal mart can hardly be considered small

[JackWhistle]

11:07 PM on 06/29/2011

Mom's and Pop's used to provide jobs, until the monopolistic Walmarts took over. Read a little history. Talk to someone older than you.

'Was a time when someone could just walk down the street and get a job. Now, if they don't pass the "Corporate Loyalty" tests (very similar to Communistic loyalty tests btw) they don't get a job.

I am abandoning the entire concept of employer, and learning art and programming. I will be my own employer, and hopefully one day, I will grow my business and not be so selfish as todays treacherous business men. Those fools who take all the profit from the jump in worker productivity, while giving the workers nothing. I hope I will retain my Humanity enough to not lobby congress to make rules that will leave my less affluent relatives begging for scraps. I hope that I don't become as you, someone who hasn't even attempted to study a situation before they post upon it. Troll you are and troll you remain, though you will find no dark craig to hide within here.

Truth be told, I love you. It was people like you that made me realize what comprise the Right in this nation. Please, educate the Newbs.

[mrst2328]

09:03 PM on 06/29/2011

all the dems do is whine... where is their plan for the deficit? That's right, there is none!

[Matt Chernesky]

09:35 PM on 06/29/2011

14th Amendment.

[rossandsheila]

10:52 PM on 06/29/2011

Stupid answer,but consider the source,a HUFFPOSTER!

[JackWhistle]

11:13 PM on 06/29/2011

I got one right here, its called TAXES ON THE RICH! The richies who don't share in our suffering. The richies who don't spend their blood on our battlefields. The richies who don't spend time in our prisons (unless they steal from other richies of course). The richies who rely on propagandized people such as yourself, who never take the time to peruse the data of the past.

Better hope that the people of this nation don't get a chance to directly vote on such taxes. It would be a bloodbath.

Btw... G.I. generation eventually had 90% taxes on the super rich. They also greatly expanded Unions and pensions and workers rights. At the same time they turned this nation into a super power economy. Care to explain?

[Taliaferro44]

02:22 AM on 06/30/2011

Go after the rich, right? The liberals want the rich to support them and the corporations to give jobs, but they hate both. Go to work, and perhaps you can "share the wealth".

[smokslives11]

08:07 PM on 06/29/2011

Sounds like a bunch of whining to me. The SC is the FINAL word on what is and what isn't legal under the US Constitution. I guess the "change" liberals want is to the basic laws which have governed this nation for over 2 hundred years?

[rpaul69]

08:18 PM on 06/29/2011

Nope...like their Socialist leader they just want to completely disregard the U.S. Constitution.

[JackWhistle]

11:16 PM on 06/29/2011

Considering that basic laws didn't allow unlimited corporate spending for the past 100 years.. I feel a projection coming from you so hard it hurts.

You better HOPE those billionaires buying votes out there succeed. If they don't, your policies don't stand a chance.

[George Mason IV]

02:29 AM on 06/30/2011

How much do they pay for their votes?