The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
FAQ    Search

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1934 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 93, 94, 95, 96, 97
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Thu November 08, 2018 8:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unqualified to be an Admin
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Wed December 19, 2012 9:53 pm
Posts: 9677
Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA
--- wrote:
dimejinky99 wrote:
4/5 wrote:
dimejinky99 wrote:
4/5 wrote:
I'm not a fan of democratically electing judges.

dimejinky99 wrote:
I really don’t understand that. How can a judge be left or right leaning?
They’re there to interpret the law. Surely their personal politics should never be allowed inform their decision? I’ve never heard of conservative judges or liberal judges anywhere else? I’m pretty sure it’s totally forbidden here and in Europe

In the U.S. this typically plays out in a way that conservatives and liberals tend to interpret the Constitution differently, so there will be sometimes be cases where liberal and conservative judges rule differently on the same issue. This isn't necessarily overtly political, although sometimes it sure seems to be. At the same time, it's not something that can be "forbidden."



But that’s not interpreting the law objectively, as they should be doing with no personal moral or political bias. My pal just explained to me it really comes down to some judges view it through the constitution as exactly and originally written and others filter it andadapt it through a modern context. That explains the left/right/conservative/liberal of it all to me, but it still doesn’t make sense they’re allowed interpret personally rather than objectively.

I think the bolded is basically the point. But their job, of course, is to interpret the Constitution objectively.

Take Obamacare for example. 4 Justices believed Congress had the power to pass that law based on the powers given to them in the commerce clause. 4 others felt they weren't allowed to do so because they believe in a much stricter interpretation of the commerce clause. The 9th said Congress had the power to pass the law based on their power to tax. Of course you could make an argument that the 4 who said Congress could do it because of commerce were really just allowing it because they personally favored the policy, but I think it's usually close to impossible to untangle where one's constitutional/judicial philosophies and personal political beliefs start and end.



So that’s where being given the nod for the job by a president with personal interests or party policies comes in and rigs it for their own then right?

That whole system flat out sucks

The system is just fine. There are both horizontal (the legislative and executive branches) and vertical (competing claims to jurisdictional supremacy) checks on the judicial branch that continue to work well enough, though certainly not as optimally as some might prefer.

Following nomination, all SCOTUS nominees have to be confirmed by a majority in the Senate. This process has become nakedly partisan in a way that just wasn't the case until about thirty years ago. Antonin Scalia, paragon of the right's more constrained and "originalist" method of Constitutional interpretation, was confirmed 98-0 in 1986. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, paragon of the left's more expansive and "purposivist" method of Constitutional interpretation, was confirmed 96-3 in 1993.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... ted_States

_________________
"In a roundabout way, Boba Fett created Pearl Jam." - Chuck Klosterman


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 12:22 am 
Offline
Rank This Poster
 Profile

Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Posts: 4544
B wrote:
Jesus, my phone actually notified me about RBG's fall. She needs to stop fucking around!


Has any president appointed 3 SCOTUS judges in their first term?

_________________
Kaius wrote:
I really hope we get this figured out soon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 12:28 am 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Posts: 14243
Location: Cumberland, RI
Bi_3 wrote:
B wrote:
Jesus, my phone actually notified me about RBG's fall. She needs to stop fucking around!


Has any president appointed 3 SCOTUS judges in their first term?


Nixon appointed 4 in his first term, I believe.

_________________
McParadigm wrote:
lol


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 12:36 am 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Posts: 14243
Location: Cumberland, RI
Simple Torture wrote:
Bi_3 wrote:
B wrote:
Jesus, my phone actually notified me about RBG's fall. She needs to stop fucking around!


Has any president appointed 3 SCOTUS judges in their first term?


Nixon appointed 4 in his first term, I believe.


Hoover, a one-term president, appointed three. Harding, who was only in office for 2 1/2 years before he died, appointed 4.

_________________
McParadigm wrote:
lol


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 12:37 am 
Offline
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 22123
Location: the beach
how many managers did steinbrenner appoint?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 12:40 am 
Offline
User avatar
The Master
 Profile

Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm
Posts: 37858
simple schoolboy wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:
Then he probably shouldn’t be on the SC huh


Use this one weird trick to make your ideologocal opponent unfit for SCOTUS.

Not the point but nice joke attempt


Would you care to elaborate on this?

Wasn't saying anything about his or my ideology. I was merely suggesting that if someone genuinely believes that every decision he makes will be based on "revenge" against one party, it seems strange that said person - if they cared at all about the integrity of our democracy - would be cool with someone that irrational being in a position to impact our laws and freedoms in this country.

_________________
lennytheweedwhacker wrote:
E.H. Ruddock wrote:
What's going on in here

a lot of hurt


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 12:42 am 
Offline
User avatar
Looks Like a Cat
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Posts: 14243
Location: Cumberland, RI
doug rr wrote:
how many managers did steinbrenner appoint?


Image

"Yogi Berra, Lou Pinella, Bucky Dent, Billy Martin, Dallas Green, Dick Houser, Bill Virdon, Billy Martin, Scott Marrow, Billy Martin, Bob Lemmon, Billy Martin, Gene Michael, Buck Showalter, … uh, tut!, . . .George, you didn't hear that from me!"

_________________
McParadigm wrote:
lol


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 12:46 am 
Offline
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 22123
Location: the beach
:)


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 2:07 am 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am
Posts: 9687
96583UP wrote:
can't wait for ginsburg to announce she has 8 days to live and then Karl Rove gets sworn in

_________________
Pollster Rights for All


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 2:10 am 
Offline
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 22123
Location: the beach
dry aged ribs


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 2:11 am 
Offline
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 22123
Location: the beach
wrong thread


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 2:13 am 
Offline
User avatar
Mind Your Tanners
 Profile

Joined: Sun September 15, 2013 5:50 am
Posts: 9687
no, this is exactly what this thread needs

_________________
Pollster Rights for All


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 11:34 am 
Offline
Rank This Poster
 Profile

Joined: Wed April 20, 2016 7:11 pm
Posts: 4544
doug rr wrote:
dry aged ribs





RBG2: Weekend at Bader-Ginsberg's

_________________
Kaius wrote:
I really hope we get this figured out soon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court
PostPosted: Fri November 09, 2018 4:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
 Profile

Joined: Tue September 24, 2013 5:56 pm
Posts: 24546
Location: Different mountains than Strat.
Bi_3 wrote:
doug rr wrote:
dry aged ribs





RBG2: Weekend at Bader-Ginsberg's

:lol:


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1934 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 93, 94, 95, 96, 97

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BootsToAsses, dimejinky99, philpritchard, Rob and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Tue November 13, 2018 6:44 pm