Katrina, illegal wiretapping? Not our problem say Supremes
This sort of nonsense is yet another example of the “legacy” of little king George, sadly:
Supreme Court rejects Katrina victims’ flood insurance case
WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court has refused to offer help to Hurricane Katrina victims who want their insurance companies to pay for flood damage to their homes and businesses.
The justices on Tuesday rejected appeals from Xavier University and 68 other individuals and businesses seeking to allow their lawsuits against the insurers to go forward.
Xavier asked the court to step in after the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the policies did not cover damage from floods, even those that resulted from man-made failures such as the collapsed levees in New Orleans.</em>
A flood is a flood. Big weather, big water, big duh. Pay the claims, and then get the money back from the slackass mf’s who claimed the levees would hold- because you wrote the policies based on their assurances that the levees would hold. The people living in the houses did their part- they paid the premiums. So the only people in this entire wretched tragedy that actually DID what they were supposed to wind up ruined, while the insurance companies pocket their dollars and walk away whistling with the conscience of a sociopath, aided and abetted by the Supreme Court. The Army Corp of Engineers is allowed to lie and continue to put people at risk, hoping against hope that another storm doesn’t hit.
Don’t care about Katrina? Didn’t happen to you, so no harm, no foul? Ok, try this:
Supreme Court rejects warrantless wiretapping case
The Supreme Court “has rejected a challenge to the Bush administration’s domestic spying program” brought forth by the American Civil Liberties Union. The court offered “no comment explaining why they turned down the appeal,” which seeks to allow a lawsuit over the warrantless wiretapping program. It was dismissed by a lower court “because the plaintiffs cannot prove their communications have been monitored.”
And why can’t they prove it? Because the criminals doing the illegal wiretapping (which was started PRIOR to 9-11, don’t forget) won’t say who they spied on. So, the Supreme Court could have said that since no single person was named, ANYONE with a telephone had standing to sue, but then that’s not why people like Roberts and Scalia were installed there, is it?
You know, if somebody would found a country based on equal representation under the law for all its citizens, I betcha a bunch of folks would move there.
