• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rehnquist and O'Connor may retire

Five four decisions really bother me in that it become very obvious that the law created by their votes is political ideology. I'd like to see 9 mid roaders who go either way with 9 - 0 votes. Old law ought to be settled law. To overturn Roe v Wade is not good law. But, back in the Warren court '64 when equal but separate was found to be unatainable it over turned old settled law... and was good.
Oh well.. I'll get my C-span seat ready.
 
Originally posted by: HJD1
Five four decisions really bother me in that it become very obvious that the law created by their votes is political ideology. I'd like to see 9 mid roaders who go either way with 9 - 0 votes. Old law ought to be settled law. To overturn Roe v Wade is not good law. But, back in the Warren court '64 when equal but separate was found to be unatainable it over turned old settled law... and was good.
Oh well.. I'll get my C-span seat ready.
Click to expand...

see, whats acceptable by society changes
 


see, whats acceptable by society changes[/quote]

what is acceptable by society does but, when you fill a court one way or another you define society by political party and for longer than a congressional cycle when society opts to change its balance in congress to match its wants.
 
Lucky for them there is a republican in the white house to replace them, thankfully they are above such political chicanery, just coincidental timing I'm sure....
 
Good luck getting right wing wacko selections past democrat filabusters. Anything less than a centrist will probably not get past commitee. The fringes should not get voice or power over the masses, and fringe obliged Judges will not survive the scrutiny that is in place as a tool to stop foolish, lopsided selections to win. That is what congress is for. I am sure it will work just fine.
 
Originally posted by: Tripleshot
Good luck getting right wing wacko selections past democrat filabusters. Anything less than a centrist will probably not get past commitee. The fringes should not get voice or power over the masses, and fringe obliged Judges will not survive the scrutiny that is in place as a tool to stop foolish, lopsided selections to win. That is what congress is for. I am sure it will work just fine.
Click to expand...

Was Ginsburg filibustered?
 
Originally posted by: przero
Just 2 more like either Scalia or Thomas will be fine!
Click to expand...

Oh yeah...that would rock.
rolleye.gif


Better yet...let's just make two clones of Scalia...
 
To help end filibusters they are goig to put in place new rules:

1: Not allow to sit down
2: Not allow to change speakers
3: Not being allow to leave for the bathroom
4: Not able to leave the floor
5: Nota allowed to inhale
 
Originally posted by: przero
hopefully Bush will appoint someone to the right of Scalia and Thomas!
Click to expand...

and that would be? Stalin and Hitler?

I know Scalia is sometimes a swing vote, but Thomas is pretty conservative.

Bush is searching for conservative minorites, spanish preferably, but is having trouble finding one....

 
Nothing, including the naming of Bush as President by the Supreme Court could be as ugly as Bush trying to fill two Supreme Court vacancies. This WILL be ugly. The Democrats want their pound of flesh, and this will be their means of getting it.
 
Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Nothing, including the naming of Bush as President by the Supreme Court could be as ugly as Bush trying to fill two Supreme Court vacancies. This WILL be ugly. The Democrats want their pound of flesh, and this will be their means of getting it.
Click to expand...

That's always been the case.

 
Originally posted by: NightTrain
Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
Nothing, including the naming of Bush as President by the Supreme Court could be as ugly as Bush trying to fill two Supreme Court vacancies. This WILL be ugly. The Democrats want their pound of flesh, and this will be their means of getting it.
Click to expand...

That's always been the case.
Click to expand...

Of course. Dems do it to the Repubs, and vice versa. That was the fear of the some of the founding fathers, that people would put Party above People. It was true before their time, and certain has been since.
 
This was why the Supreme court stole the election. Some wanted out but didn't want to leave under Gore. They would have left immediately but for the fact the hypocracy would have been to imediate not to have created a storm. Let memories fade, then retire. People have short memories. Even more importantly, we are beginning to see that what politicians do is irrelivant to the people. They are watching wrestling. the right has no real need to be circumspect about a takeover.
 
It would certainly lead to interesting elections in the future...

"Bush ran for his 5th term and lost by 80% to a Libertarian tree stump. As per the last 5 elections the Supreme court overturned the ballet counting process handing Bush an easy victory."
 
Unfortunately, I think HJD1 is right in that we're going to see a lot of 5-4 decisions. What happens is they'll rule 5-4 in Case A. Then along comes an appeal similar to Case A but slightly different and they rule 5-4 in that case. So you get the law is x in Case A but the law is y in Case A-2. IMO, this in not a good thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top