Anthony Kennedy Retires From SCOTUS

  • That or he saw Hillary naked and threw up.


    Have you seen the latest? They’re claiming Kavenaugh once wrote that the president is above the law. Bulkshit, I found the article. He has to be impeached first THEN he can face criminal charges for whatever. While in office he’s protected because he’s kinda busy with world stuff.


    Liberals, disingenuous shitstains.

    Backyard Commandos INC, HMFIC


    I disagree but I respect your right to be stupid.


    Winners focus on winning, losers focus on winners.

  • oh elfin one.... I asked who decides all in caps because I figured it would make it easier to read and understand............I was.........wrong.


    Automatic? LOL... three strikes and you are out. You say that it is unconstitutional to have various gun control laws. cause...well... the guys you like are in. The new guys say you are wrong.... strike one strike two... then three and a conservative judge is out.


    this is why I don't get along with the far right any more than the far left... both sides want to give power away to government. the judicial is a branch of the government. they already have all the power they need.


    Suggesting the three strike thing and it being automatic is most likely...........................unconstitutional.


    The judges that ruled yes on your little power grab would have one strike against em.


    lazs

    "Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."



    Pancho Villa, last words (1877 - 1923)

  • Think of it like the ill conceived three strikes crime laws... so the guy gets a third strike. he goes to prison for some pre ordained time like 20 years.... half way through they find out he didn't do at least one of the crimes.


    With the judges... couple of em get tossed in the three strikes thing... 20 years later those rulings are overturned. what do you do then?


    No... it is a sword you hang over their head that makes em makes em afraid to make any decision good or bad.


    And yeah... I know it sounds great to beat the shit out of the other guy when you are the winner but eventually you have to hand that club back over to him.


    It still comes down to..... who interprets the constitution?


    lazs

    "Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."



    Pancho Villa, last words (1877 - 1923)

  • So what is your solution to things like the 9th Circuit? We just let them keep their jobs and keep fucking up?


    The only people in America that get to keep their jobs while being complete fuck-ups are cops and government officials.

    Automatic? LOL... three strikes and you are out. You say that it is unconstitutional to have various gun control laws. cause...well... the guys you like are in. The new guys say you are wrong.... strike one strike two... then three and a conservative judge is out.

    Like Airhead, you are making the case for a living document. The meaning and intent of the Constitution doesn't change unless we Amend it.

  • My 'solution' is no solution at all... it is to let things go as the founders set em up. it is you who wants to modify the judicial system... to make it a living document.


    There are mechanisms in place to get rid of insane judges. you just want stricter mechanisms that were never intended by the founders.


    You are young enough to end up seeing the folly of your ways tho. the club you give your guys to beat up the other guys.... is gonna come back to haunt you.


    Not to mention.. most judges would end up not ruling on anything for fear of being overturned.. I say 'most' cause lefties judges have no fear... they would continue to make bad rulings....


    And say you got a few kicked off? if the POTUS at the time was a leftie? he would just appoint someone worse.


    All in all the three strikes idea is one of the worst I have ever heard.


    lazs

    "Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."



    Pancho Villa, last words (1877 - 1923)

  • We just now finally got in power. None of you guys even cared about judges during the election... I kept saying how important they were.... now? they are important?


    Look... we are gonna get 3 SC judges.... we are gonna get more than 100 federal judges.... why try to turn it into a curb stomp? The judicial will be changed for 40 years or more in our direction... relax. don't go all scorched earth on this shit.


    lazs

    "Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."



    Pancho Villa, last words (1877 - 1923)

  • Not entirely true. I’ve been keenly aware of the SCOTUS aging members and the impact the last election could have on it for some time. I have a lot of free time at work to read. I know I’m not the only one that did, not in this forum.


    Judicial activism must be dealt with immediately. How it gets done remains to be seen.

    Backyard Commandos INC, HMFIC


    I disagree but I respect your right to be stupid.


    Winners focus on winning, losers focus on winners.

  • So you would change the intent of the founders so that judges acted more in a manner that you approve of?


    You want something done about it now (surprise) but did not care at all when the monkey boy was in.


    What you want is to extend the power of the executive over the judicial... I get it... you want to change the rules now that our guys are in. It is always tempting and always stupid.


    Those who think like you do eventually learn the meaning of the expression "hoisted on his own petard"


    But yeah... I get it... it is fun to huff and puff and posture about the evils.


    lazs

    "Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something."



    Pancho Villa, last words (1877 - 1923)

  • a simple test would be to look at rulings that had an obvious left /right outcome, and look and see how many liberal justices ever came down on the right side vs the opposite

    Propaganda is a manipulation tool focused primarily on emotions. It has little to do with truth or facts and everything to do with persuasion and motivation.

  • You did it again, stop that.


    Judicial activism has been going on for some time. All this legislating from the bench crap should have been stomped the first time it reared its ugly head.


    Which brings us back to how, exactly, do we do that?

    Backyard Commandos INC, HMFIC


    I disagree but I respect your right to be stupid.


    Winners focus on winning, losers focus on winners.

  • Oh, is that all.

    Backyard Commandos INC, HMFIC


    I disagree but I respect your right to be stupid.


    Winners focus on winning, losers focus on winners.

  • That's somewhat an "after the barn door got opened" plan

    Propaganda is a manipulation tool focused primarily on emotions. It has little to do with truth or facts and everything to do with persuasion and motivation.

  • My 'solution' is no solution at all... it is to let things go as the founders set em up. it is you who wants to modify the judicial system... to make it a living document.

    No Jane, you have it all wrong again, as usual.


    All I want is for judges to rule according to the Constitution, as it was written and with the Founders intent in mind. And if they don't do that? Get rid of the fuckers. Unless we change the text of the document via Amendment, that text never changes and neither does the intent of the Founders. You and Airhead talking about how if we overturn and toss out this set of judges, and then what happens with the next administration....all a crock of shit. That's exactly what the advocates for a living document argue, the Constitution can be interpreted differently based on the times. I say the exact opposite


    You'd let them stay forever, fucking up everything about America. Unlike you, I'm smart enough to understand that we can't fix something that is broken if we never make any changes. Hell I'm even willing to try as many different things as it takes to get rid of activism from the bench. If something doesn't work, scrap it and try something else ffs. But doing nothing? What good does that do?

  • Just look at dissenting opinions on any of the cases that were heard in the SC over the past 30 or so years. Hell, look at the ones in Heller. They split as to left and right, constitution-shmonstitution.

  • You did it again, stop that.


    Judicial activism has been going on for some time. All this legislating from the bench crap should have been stomped the first time it reared its ugly head.


    Which brings us back to how, exactly, do we do that?


    Exactly. There is basically NO recourse America has against Judges losing their fucking minds.

  • Actually Dann, there is. Judges can be recommended by the Federal or State legislatures for impeachment then tried by their Senate. So yes, if a judge is caught molesting 3 year old Mexican kids most State legislatures would vote him out of office. Except California- the Dems would name him Attorney General.


    In addition judges can be recalled by voters, or- if they anger the Clintons- they may meet up with an unfortunate accident.


    Elfie, you and I want the same kind of stricter interpretation to the Constitution- Thomas Jefferson would be rolling in his grave over asset forfeiture for instance. So would George Jefferson.