Yeah, except in that case (gun control) the decision would be tethered to the constitution. The same sex marriage ruling, for better or worse, doesn't seem to be.

Self-Government




...just looking at that particular collection of letters gives me a chuckle.

In its decision yesterday in Texas Department of Housing v. Inclusive Communities Project upheld the notion that racial discrimination within a community is proved by the absence of racial diversity in a neighborhood for instance, the so-called disparate racial impact doctrine.

This is a fundamental reversal of the evidentiary basis of proof, i.e. evidence of discriminatory intent or treatment. Now the outcome is sufficient to prove racial discrimination.

WCH,

Am very glad you asked this question.

The principle of the government thinking it has the right to step in and save us from ourselves, becasue they can, is my problem with this ruling. The freedom to choose where we hang our hats should be ours, not the governments, IMHO.

Take for instance my sisters house. The land it sits on was bought and paid for in cash, as were all the materials used to build it, as well as all of the furniture and equiptment that is inside it. It was constructed for a person with special needs, and it sits on a quiet street in a quiet area, away from the city noise. The neighboorhood itself is only ten years old, and of the 50 or so houses, maybe 95%are occupied by caucasian families.

Why? Who knows?

The lots were available to the general public for sale, and all HOA rules for constrution had to be followed by all who wanted to build. All plans had to be pre-approved by the same desk at city hall, and all fees had to be paid to the same desk, again, at city hall. As far as my memory can serve, the only rules were for square footage, roof pitch, driveway width, and a fun one...the amount % of brick versus other materials used for the ediface of the house. ;)

The race of the occupants was not on the list for future residents of this neighborhood.

So what door does this ruling open up? Is the government now going to come to our door and cry racial discrmination due to who chooses to live where?

The choice should be ours, not the governments, IMVHO.:munchin

Yeah, desegregation busing was another "tool".

As has been said, you grow up and fight your way out of the ghetto/poorhouse, get a good education, buy a nice house in a "safe" neighborhood and "BAM" the government decides to bring the ghetto to your doorstep.

Having grown up "dirt" poor I'll be the first to say screw that. I don't live in major liberal asshole cities for a reason. And it's funny my black/brown/yellow neighbors have nice houses and nice cars and cute little kids that play outside.

And it has zero to do with forced government integration.

Seems old Alex misjudged the judges. From Federalist 78:

"Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments."

Pat

They don't spend money....
 

They don't spend money but their decisions can force local, state governments and private businesses to spend money to comply with their decisions.

Rulings from our Rulers
 

This recent ruling concerning who lives where and why, should open the eyes for anyone concerned about freedom. Well, the amount of freedom our elected leaderships allows us to believe we have. To those that aren't paying attention, there is no change, as "it doesn't affect me".

The housing ruling pretty much declares anyone, any town, must continuously prove they are not discriminating. Forms and declarations must be made every year or so, and all of these must show how your local gubmint is appeasing the Feds to satisfy their desire to weaken the self-governed mentality. Forget about voting district restructuring, this will blow that away. It looks like the Russians moving their own citizens and loyal Communists into the towns of occupied nations under the USSR.

Now the Progressives will be able to have a bigger say in areas they were traditionally excluded from/ kept out. All they need is ONE person to raise the discrimination flag and the whole Federal Gubmint comes swooping into to squash your little town. We've been watching this form up for decades.

Combine the housing rulings with:

Environmental - Your well water is not your own, as you stick a straw into the People's water; some places even restrict rain water collection. Have a well, expect to see regulations requiring EVERY household to have a water meter to record usage, which accompanying taxes/ fees.

Communications - Telephone and cable are under constant attack to limit what is considered "fair" and authorized by Gubmint. First Amendment doesn't cover wireless or electronics, and if our Founding Fathers intended it too, they would have included it, right?

Education - Our children and the future of our Nation are being instructed along Gubmint lines. Oh wait, our Founding Fathers must have missed this one, so SCOTUS will support GUBMINT regulation into what our children learn.

Utility/ Power - Solar is regulated to the point that you would think the Gubmint owns the Sun. Try stopping your local electric utility from installing the smart meter on your home.

Transportation - Mileage taxes are constantly being presented.

The list just goes on. The SCOTUS rulings and the Executive moves are clear indication of a group of people that intends to stay in power. All of these little noticed actions are an effort of the bigger cause for their desired Utopia.

Agh... So disappointing.

I asked what freedoms YOU (not someone else) lost today. Since you brought your sister's situation in Texas up, what exactly did she loose by the decision made by the TDOH?

Well said FlagDayNCO! The sad fact is that the bureaucracy grows by the day, not only in size and scope, but in power and political activism. Liberty, to a large degree, is a facade at this stage...

Well - this sort of housing exclusion foofarah is an old story in which one, when reviewed and whether in agreement with them or not, can certainly see how it must impact these sorts of rulings today.

<snip> Their efforts {restrictive covenants} were buttressed by the federal government. In 1934, Congress created the Federal Housing Administration. The FHA insured private mortgages, causing a drop in interest rates and a decline in the size of the down payment required to buy a house. But an insured mortgage was not a possibility for Clyde Ross. The FHA had adopted a system of maps that rated neighborhoods according to their perceived stability. On the maps, green areas, rated “A,” indicated “in demand” neighborhoods that, as one appraiser put it, lacked “a single foreigner or Negro.” These neighborhoods were considered excellent prospects for insurance. Neighborhoods where black people lived were rated “D” and were usually considered ineligible for FHA backing. They were colored in red. Neither the percentage of black people living there nor their social class mattered. Black people were viewed as a contagion. Redlining went beyond FHA-backed loans and spread to the entire mortgage industry, which was already rife with racism, excluding black people from most legitimate means of obtaining a mortgage.<snip>

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/...ations/361631/

And so it goes...

Richard

WCH,

Since you have asked, I will divulge the specifics of the scenario in question, so that it may assist in the understanding of my post.

My twin sister has a closed head injury from a car accident, and is now blind, and unable to walk to talk. She lives with a disability, like alot of folks in this Country, and therefore has other family members to help ensure her quality of life is maintained. We are not special, just regular Americans attempting to live life like everybody else. Hence we built a house, with my aforementioned posts' attributes, for this purpose.

She does not live in Texas, but the Supreme Court Case in this ruling was a case intialized in a case from the state of Texas.

The broad brush of this ruling applies to ALL Americans in any State, County, or neighboorhood, and it is attempting to take away OUR rights to choose where we live and build our houses. This is intended to drag in Race as a form of discrimination, to populate ANY area the government chooses is not duly populated with...Diversity, IMVHO.

(If my sister could type her reply to your question, she would, as we discuss these rulings, and topics presented here on PS.com on a regular basis.):)

I am just speaking for her, and our joint opinion about this particular topic of Rights.

Holly:munchin

I fail to see that you sister lost any of her freedom that day. Have a nice day!

Freedoms
 

WCH Sir,

My appologies for not being able to correctly convey the POV in my posts to help you understand my thinking. My posts were JMHO.

But please know this, you do not ever have to wish me to have a nice day, because it is us, the average American, who owe You SF Men a warm wish of thanks, and hope you all have a nice day! One filled with accomplishment, success, and fulfillment. :)

For me and my sis, like many Americans, please know that we realize each and every day, we enjoy our freedoms because of you and all brave SF Men!

Each and every freedom we have we cherish, hold dear, and pray for, everyday.

You mean so much to us as Americans, and no matter what, we will never quit or give up supporting you all. Never.

Took this little thread to say this, but it needs to be said more these days IMHO.

Holly

You got it, FlagDayNCO!!!

And WCH, to your question to Echoes, "What freedoms did you lose today?" Please see above highlighted in red.

It's not always about "me" and how something effects "me" personally in the moment. IMO, Echoes, you, and every American lost something very precious. Oh, maybe it's not perceptible at this moment, but the subtle shift of power to the Executive branch will have it's impact nonetheless.

We all, and our rights as individuals have lost a level of protection from Federal incursions into our lives. No, today nothing will change for me or Echoes or you tomorrow as a result of this ruling. But rest assured the effect will ultimately be felt by all of us sooner or later.

This ruling is not about Fair Housing, that's the misdirection! It is about shifting power and the precedent set by the majority opinion is what scares the hell out of me. The precedent set by this ruling virtually guarantees that the aggregation of power will continue in every other agency of the Executive branch of government.

Just look at the actions taken by the Bureau of Land Management last year. A good example of Executive over-reach that was only thwarted by the likely possibility of armed resistance resulting in the political decision to back-off only because of the terrible optics that would create. This single act, IMO, revealed the intent. Now the Executive branch has another tool to use in an extra-Congressional manner as it sees fit. The anti-Federalists worst nightmare on steroids! Show me where in the Constitution it is written that "Any action not taken by the Congress shall be deemed to have the same effect as affirmative action."

Let alone the illogical position that outcomes are proof of any premise: e.g. Your neighbor is dead, you were the last person to see your neighbor alive, ergo you caused your neighbor's death. Or how about this: Women got the right to vote, since then we have experienced a great depression and two world wars, ergo women's right to vote cause economic depression and world wars? How the SCOTUS came up with that logic just makes my head hurt!

So, WCH, the corollary question back to you is: Name one important aspect of your life that is not regulated in some way by an agency of the Executive branch of the Federal government? Then name me one freedom, one right, that you have as an individual citizen that cannot be effectively taken away by Executive fiat?

After thought: WCH, it just occurred to me that your question may have been probative to elicit Echoes' thought process on this matter. So, in that case - NEVERMIND! :D