The Supreme Court

#26
#26
k-town_king said:
Yes they are. The precedent was set in the 1800s with rulings on slavery. Since then the SCOTUS has made rulings that shape the country. They interpret the laws and their application, which in turn shapes the US.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely nothing about having 9 people with lifetime appointments given power to "shape" the country that should make you comfortable. If that idea doesn't scare you then either you aren't thinking it through very well or you've got a wildly different definition of "shape" than I do in this context. The phrase "Legislating from the bench." should pretty much always have a negative connotation.

The fact you couldn't even make it through your original assertion without politicizing the Court's purview (liberal=progress) is telling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#27
#27
k-town_king said:
Yes they are. The precedent was set in the 1800s with rulings on slavery. Since then the SCOTUS has made rulings that shape the country. They interpret the laws and their application, which in turn shapes the US.
Click to expand...
You are obsessed with talking about slavery.
 
#34
#34
hndog609 said:
There is absolutely nothing about having 9 people with lifetime appointments given power to "shape" the country that should make you comfortable. If that idea doesn't scare you then either you aren't thinking it through very well or you've got a wildly different definition of "shape" than I do in this context. The phrase "Legislating from the bench." should pretty much always have a negative connotation.

The fact you couldn't even make it through your original assertion without politicizing the Court's purview (liberal=progress) is telling.
Click to expand...

Do you think this is something new? This has been the case since the 1800s. Why should it scare me now?


b
1972 Grad said:
You are obsessed with talking about slavery.
Click to expand...

Huh? Maybe you aren't too well versed in history. The precedent was set for the SCOTUS to interpret the law in a case about slavery. Acknowledging facts isn't obsessing like you are obsessed with Black people and how they vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#35
#35
k-town_king said:
Do you think this is something new? This has been the case since the 1800s. Why should it scare me now?


b

Huh? Maybe you aren't too well versed in history. The precedent was set for the SCOTUS to interpret the law in a case about slavery. Acknowledging facts isn't obsessing like you are obsessed with Black people and how they vote.
Click to expand...
wow.
 
#38
#38
k-town_king said:
Wow what?

The SCOTUS has been politicized since the 1800s. That is a fact.

72 is obsessed with Black people and their actions. Also a fact.
Click to expand...
I go to sleep thinking about black people and their actions, and I wake up thinking about black people and their actions. LOL!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#39
#39
k-town_king said:
Great. That is called progress. We don't need a bunch of 80 year old conservatives who are out of touch with reality making decisions that will shape the country.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because we need 80 year olds like these!

image.jpg
 
#41
#41
ClearwaterVol said:
It+all+makes+sense+now+_610d1c41543ddf5cab8e9cd243e5bb85.jpg
Click to expand...

Bad form CV...... Sh***y at best
 
#43
#43
Supreme Court declines to take up Democrats’ Trump emoluments suit

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to take up a case from 200 congressional Democrats alleging that President Trump is improperly profiting from his position.

The suit brought by Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut argued that the commander-in-chief violated the Constitution’s foreign emoluments clause through his continued ownership of companies engaged in business with foreign governments.

Lawmakers asked the Supreme Court to review a February ruling by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals that threw out the legal challenge, arguing the Democratic lawmakers lacked the legal right to sue the president.

The Supreme Court did not give a reason for refusing to take up the case Tuesday, but the denial means that Democratic lawmakers failed to get support from at least four of the bench’s nine justices.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/13/supreme-court-declines-to-take-up-democrats-trump-emoluments-suit/
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top