When the white or the wealthy win, it is "Justice Denied" according to this editorial.

In the 1960s, Chief Justice Earl Warren presided over a Supreme Court that interpreted the Constitution in ways that protected the powerless — racial and religious minorities, consumers, students and criminal defendants. At the end of its first full term, Chief Justice John Roberts’s court is emerging as the Warren court’s mirror image. Time and again the court has ruled, almost always 5-4, in favor of corporations and powerful interests while slamming the courthouse door on individuals and ideals that truly need the court’s shelter.

* * *

It has been decades since the most privileged members of society — corporations, the wealthy, white people who want to attend school with other whites — have had such a successful Supreme Court term. Society’s have-nots were not the only losers. The basic ideals of American justice lost as well.

And when it comes right down to it, the decision cited -- some which I agree with, others which I do not -- don't really matter. What has the NY Times angry is that "corporations, the wealthy, [and] white people" won in them. Never mind that those decisions all had solid legal and/or Constituitonal reasoning to support them -- the NY Times does not like who won, so they cannot be legitimate. Indeed, it would appear that the editors believe that Lady Justice should rip off her blindfold and put her thumb on the scale to ensure that "corporations, the wealthy, [and] white people" even if the law and the Constitution are on their side.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Big Dog's Weblog, Maggie's Notebook, Right Truth, The Populist, Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Pursuing Holiness, stikNstein... has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, High Desert Wanderer, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.