Activist Judge Blocks Arizona SB1070

#51
#51
volholio said:
I don't give a rat's ass about this particular law one way or the other.

My point is simple: Are the courts an equal branch in the US Constitution or aren't they?

If they are, then what is their role?

I argue that it is supposed to rule on the Constitutionality of the laws passed by the legislative branch and signed by the Executive branch.

If the Courts--up to the Supreme Court--rule that a particular law--such as one that eliminates the Executive Branch--violates the USC, then it is its, the Courts, moral responsibility to strike that law (or sections of it down). That doesn't make the Court "Activist."

Anytime it overturns a law on Constitutional law doesn't make it "activist."

My argument if this law is Constitutional or not. The Courts will decide that. My problem is will the "activist" label in the OP.

Nothing more or nothing less.

Now, if you all want to be all angry with the Mexicans, then so be it. Teach your children to be *******s and racist for all I care. Indeed, move your ass to Arizona with all other old as hell white people who can only breathe arid air. All of that is your prerogative and between you and your own heart.

But that has absolutely nothing to do with my point.
Click to expand...

comic_book_guyCOMPUTER.jpg


Clown-Master.jpg
 
#54
#54
BigPapaVol said:
Clearly your point was only about legal procedure, as it's abundantly apparent that have no dog in this fight. Your overwhelming objectivity probably even puts a levelheaded guy like Obama to shame.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Just like Lindsey Graham says about Kagan: It's not my job to like or dislike her. My job is simply to judge her qualifications.

A judge's job is simply to judge the law's qualifications . . .

We can disagree with a law and still find it constitutional. That's what adults do.

So, I go back to my original point about "activist."
 
#56
#56
volholio said:
Just like Lindsey Graham says about Kagan: It's not my job to like or dislike her. My job is simply to judge her qualifications.

A judge's job is simply to judge the law's qualifications . . .

We can disagree with a law and still find it constitutional. That's what adults do.

So, I go back to my original point about "activist."
Click to expand...
And the question that three you into a leftist crying fit asked about it's unconstitutionality. Your answer will be weak, so you set out on your defense of procedure rant, which rang hollow as all hell.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#57
#57
BigPapaVol said:
You act as if her commentary isn't bigoted as all hell.

At least you've further proven your objectivity here. Look at you, all concerned with process and such. How big of you.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

How is it "bigoted." Here's what I saw her say:

“Preserving the status quo through a preliminary injunction is less harmful than allowing state laws that are likely pre-empted by federal law to be enforced,” she said.

“There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens,” she wrote. “By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose.”


Seems to me she's acting rather Conservatively, by acting slowly, and "preserving the status quo." She didn't strike the law down. She just paused it for further consideration . . .

She also argues that she's protecting "legal immigrants" from undo "burdens."

Seems reasonable and fair and far from "activist," which is a stupid term anyway, which my original post suggested.
 
#59
#59
BigPapaVol said:
And the question that three you into a leftist crying fit asked about it's unconstitutionality. Your answer will be weak, so you set out on your defense of procedure rant, which rang hollow as all hell.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Please rephrase simply and clearly . . .
 
#60
#60
you were talking about old "white" people moving to arizona. i guess no other race moves out there. just rich white old people
 
#62
#62
Does the state of Arizona require all citizens to carry ID?
 
#63
#63
I was talking about Sotomayor's comments, as was the guy you called a misogynist.

As to her dumbassery regarding legal resident being arrested based upon this law, she's a liberal hack and full of crap. Proving legal citizenship isn't Chinese Arithmetic. It is producing documents.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#65
#65
gsvol said:
Are you still the same doctrinaire marxist educator you were when you returned from the Czech Republic?

Funny how Obots are all for the constitution if they can twist it's meaning to serve their statist cause but then say it is a dated document the needs to evolve when they can't.
Click to expand...

Secrecy News letter. You still owe me a shot of slivovice, too.
 
#68
#68
volholio said:
How is it "bigoted." Here's what I saw her say:

“Preserving the status quo through a preliminary injunction is less harmful than allowing state laws that are likely pre-empted by federal law to be enforced,” she said.

“There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens,” she wrote. “By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose.”


Seems to me she's acting rather Conservatively, by acting slowly, and "preserving the status quo." She didn't strike the law down. She just paused it for further consideration . . .

She also argues that she's protecting "legal immigrants" from undo "burdens."

Seems reasonable and fair and far from "activist," which is a stupid term anyway, which my original post suggested.
Click to expand...

why is there a substantial likelyhood that LEGAL imigrants will be arrested? the law specifically states if you have a valid drivers license or other proof of legal citizenship that they cannot arrest you. or does she think all legal hispanics are too stupid to carry id?
 
#70
#70
BigPapaVol said:
I was talking about Sotomayor's comments, as was the guy you called a misogynist.

As to her dumbassery regarding legal resident being arrested based upon this law, she's a liberal hack and full of crap. Proving legal citizenship isn't Chinese Arithmetic. It is producing documents.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

are forced to show ID at the whim of a government official? And I thought you all hated government officials and wanted to shoot 'em all or something.

Or is that only the black ones?
 
#72
#72
volholio said:
are forced to show ID at the whim of a government official? And I thought you all hated government officials and wanted to shoot 'em all or something.

Or is that only the black ones?
Click to expand...

i see. so when you get pulled over by a cop in your car and he asks for license and registration you go tell him to **** himself right?
 
#74
#74
volholio said:
are forced to show ID at the whim of a government official? And I thought you all hated government officials and wanted to shoot 'em all or something.

Or is that only the black ones?
Click to expand...

At any traffic stop, just about any time an officer comes into contact with an individual he or she believes might be involved in illegal activity.
 
#75
#75
volholio said:
are forced to show ID at the whim of a government official? And I thought you all hated government officials and wanted to shoot 'em all or something.

Or is that only the black ones?
Click to expand...

Perhaps reading the law would be of some benefit?

On a side note, I smell cod. And this ain't no middle school dance.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top