Senior U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia found dead at West Texas r
- Thread starter christiefan915
- Start date
Yes I can. The very existence of the Constitution.
If the people are free to elect a government that in turn is free to do ANYTHING to the people as a whole, what is the purpose of the Bill or Rights?
How can a Federal Government be held accountable for violations of the Bill of Rights without a Court to review if the laws are a violation of those rights?
If there is no mechanism for review, what purpose is a Bill of Rights? Without such review, the elected officials are in effect without limit to their power, the government is tyrannical.
Last edited:
"To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed, are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act."
In other words, those who believe that there is no authority to decide that the Constitution voids certain laws are FUCKING IDIOTS!
In other words, those who believe that there is no authority to decide that the Constitution voids certain laws are FUCKING IDIOTS!
evince
Truthmatters
Unfortunately, too many on both sides of the political spectrum fail to recognize and/or acknowledge this.
Here's a nice little graph that shows voter turnout and there are those who might want to look at this and wonder what would occur if the missing voters showed up at the voting booths.
your party would lose everything
your voter ID laws are keeping people from voting huh
its the only way your shits can win
Well you don't get to choose. President does.
yes, I do- my representative Congress confirms or rejects.
The scotus is not a democratic institution. the people don't get a vote on their deliberations. That's what congress is for. Separation of powers. Basic. Read up child.
evince
Truthmatters
and you already hate the person even though none have been named
I did appreciate it but you are just too dumb. I can't help myself. I've never known of an adult as willfully dumb as you are. Your role is clearly in the kitchen making sandwiches, not talking with the big boys about politics. Personally, I long for the day where you drown yourself in the ocean so the entire globe can have the average iq climb ten points. Your stupidity honestly makes me hate you, and I don't really hate people. But I see you as the epitome of the dumb, overconfident uninformed voter that makes up their mind via the huffington post. A textbook prole if there ever was one. A hypocritical unprincipled circle jerking rah rah partisan with no regard for the consequence of their own actions. You are a drain on this site and my mental well being. You suck.
evince
Truthmatters
christiefan915
Catalyst
You're the poster boy for hypocrisy. You are constantly telling complainers to use ignore, thread ban, and forced ignore but you don't do the same yourself. You talk about free speech but you want people you hate to stop talking. You pretend to hate racism and sexism yet practice both through your speech. You have posted some of the ugliest drivel I've ever seen on any forum with your comments about gun violence, especially relating to children. You have been the cause of decent posters leaving this forum yet you excuse yourself by calling those people pussies. You are the one mod who does the most to drag this forum down. I don't know who in your life gave you such an over-inflated opinion of yourself but they should be shot for doing so. You come across as a minimally-educated, entitled sociopathic little twit.
Why don't you nut up already and put me on ignore, you excruciatingly foul, vulgar little man?
evince
Truthmatters
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
The GOP is pushing the whole "let the people decide" narrative, but that's such an oversimplification of elections. The vote in November is not going to be a referendum on one court vacancy. You can't just distill the entire election down to that.
cawacko
Well-known member
I HATE the idea of Obama naming Scalia's replacement but the idea of delaying a selection is nothing but a partisan political ploy.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I'd be surprised if the next President didn't have at least one liberal vacancy to fill. It all evens out.
At times like these, I tend to think there is an inherent flaw to the process. I can't really think of a better way to do it - but it just seems too arbitrary to have justices who serve for decades decided by political winds that change every few years.
cawacko
Well-known member
Good point. I'd like to think it would be easier to select strong judges but there's always some subjectivity thus the huge battles.
And I agree with this 100%.