3
3
0
Supreme Court
Constitution
Law
American History
Society
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
5
5
0
This is the kind of BS the left spews. From the article "That Court is gone forever. We will spend at least the rest of my lifetime fighting over its rotting corpse. No prating about civility can change that fact. The fight is upon us now, and the party that shirks it will be destroyed."
So, the court now is a rotting corpse because he didn't get what he wanted. Is that how it works? He seems to forget that we have elections and elections have consequences. We have lots of elections so if you continue to lose that means your ideas do not resonate with the people.
The left now appears to be hell bent on trying to undermine the court. The talk of impeaching Kavanaugh and the normal chicanery from the left is on full display. This whiney author is of that mind set...What he cannot control, he must try to destroy.
So, the court now is a rotting corpse because he didn't get what he wanted. Is that how it works? He seems to forget that we have elections and elections have consequences. We have lots of elections so if you continue to lose that means your ideas do not resonate with the people.
The left now appears to be hell bent on trying to undermine the court. The talk of impeaching Kavanaugh and the normal chicanery from the left is on full display. This whiney author is of that mind set...What he cannot control, he must try to destroy.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
It’s an ugly and circular cycle. When Obama was in office I heard and read quite often ‘SCOTUS cannot legislate from the bench’. SCOTUS has been doing it before him, and will with Trump and those after him. SCOTUS protects legacies. Interpretation of the Constitution. That depends on what party holds the reins in SCOTUS. Right now, it’s a great time to be a conservative. Both chambers, the WH, and the high courts has a conservative tilt. Will the chambers hold is a good question, and will SCOTUS be objective or be as most are partisan? If the Dems get Congress I’m not expecting a lot. But I’m sure SCOTUS will be busy either taking on cases, denying cars, and deciding cases brought on by the Dems. Kav helped write the Patriot Act and FISA. It’ll be interesting to see when one or the other pop up if the court takes it on, how he’ll react. It’ll be a good test to see where he’s going to wind up...partisan or objective?
(5)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
Let's hope the decisions are based upon the constitution first and foremost. We know that precedent without the real support of the law (Constitution) is a ruling built on shifting sand. If we don't like the constitution we have a way to change it. We can amend it through the process that that becomes a part of the document all courts should use.
SCOTUS job is not to protect legacies. They many end up doing so but their role is to make decisions based upon the constitution. The court has reversed itself over the lifetime of the court.
SCOTUS job is not to protect legacies. They many end up doing so but their role is to make decisions based upon the constitution. The court has reversed itself over the lifetime of the court.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
Cpl Jeff N. while the formal job of SCOTUS isn’t to protect legacies, that’s exactly what they do. Bush didn’t like something Clinton did or made, take it to court. Obama with Bush? Same thing. The cycle keeps going being while interpreting the constitution, usually what they’re interpreting against it is a law or EO a President or Congress made that the following administration or Congress disapproves. Obamacare is proof of that. How many times has that gone up? How many times did Congress get shot down? Obamacare is one of his signature items and a part of his legacy. Like it or not.
Can we hope SCOTUS is objective in their interpreting? I’d be a fool not to hope for it. I’d be a bigger fool not to believe there is a chance they’re going to continue legislating from the bench. Congress cannot even get enough votes to undo a decision they make. They’re actually stronger with less people than those we vote into office who are charged with making laws. Wonder why..... Can they reverse themselves sure. It’s not a regular occurrence or one we should expect.
Can we hope SCOTUS is objective in their interpreting? I’d be a fool not to hope for it. I’d be a bigger fool not to believe there is a chance they’re going to continue legislating from the bench. Congress cannot even get enough votes to undo a decision they make. They’re actually stronger with less people than those we vote into office who are charged with making laws. Wonder why..... Can they reverse themselves sure. It’s not a regular occurrence or one we should expect.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google