Page 10 of 21 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 207

Thread: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

  1. #91
    Tavern Bartender
    Kinky tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    37,196

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Definitely an important group within the GOP voting blocks. Will you release your detailed thoughts on the matter before next week?
    Only for money.
    Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields

  2. #92
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    40,334

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    I always love the criticism of "unelected judges," as if they spontaneously appear from the wild and take over our nation.
    They're like Pokemon. Let's face it, Antonin Scalia could fill in for Snorlax or Chris Christie and nobody would notice the difference.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  3. #93
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,825

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Ex Parte McCardle shows Congress telling the Supreme Court just what it will do, and like it. I don't know of a case that shows any more plainly how just weak the Court really is in a showdown, when Congress is determined to have its way.

    In February, 1867, Congress passed a law to help Northerners who were still being detained in former Confederate states. This law authorized anyone who had filed a habeas petition to challenge the lawfulness of his detention, and had a court deny it, to appeal the denial to the Circuit Court for that district (the equivalent of today's federal Courts of Appeal). And the law went even further, providing that anyone who lost in the Circuit Court could appeal right to the Supreme Court of the U.S.

    McCardle, a Mississippi newspaper editor, was arrested by the Union Army for publishing articles alleged to be "incendiary and libellous." He was held to await trial by a military commission. He then filed a habeas petition, had it denied, and cleverly took advantage of the new federal law to get his appeal before the Supreme Court. After the Court had already heard oral arguments in his case in March, 1868, an abolitionist-dominated Congress, outraged by having this treasonous rebel use its law in a way it had never intended, finally got fed up. It passed a second law that repealed the one from the year before, removing the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction over the case it was just about to decide.

    And the Court, having had Congress snatch a case right out from under its nose, knuckled under:

    What, then, is the effect of the repealing act upon the case before us? We cannot doubt as to this. Without jurisdiction the court cannot proceed at all in any cause. Jurisdiction is power to declare the law, and when it ceases to exist, the only function remaining to the court is that of announcing the fact and dismissing the cause . . . judicial duty is not less fitly performed by declining ungranted jurisdiction than in exercising firmly that which the Constitution and the laws confer.


    Anthony Kennedy and his fellow philosopher-kings felt as arrogant as they did in Obergefell in part because they know there is enough political support nationally for same-sex marriage that something like this would never happen, where that subject is concerned. That does not make their dictate any less inexcusable, though. We have a federal government, and not a national one. Issues of state law are not decided by national majorities, but by the vote of a majority in that state.

    Even if nine out of ten of Americans say in a poll that they favor a thing, it is completely irrelevant to the authority of a state where a majority opposes that thing to prohibit it by law. A constitutional right to do a thing does not suddenly leap into existence just because everyone who's in with the in crowd that years just knows that thing is cool and righteous. Statist drones who think otherwise should go and live in a dictatorship.

    When this starts to interfere with the freedom of religion, as it is bound to, the Court may want to get out the old books and remind themselves of McCardle. Religious freedom is so fundamental that most Americans will raise all Hell when it is trampled on in the name of homosexual rights. That had already begun to happen in cases involving state public accommodations laws, and Obergefell will make it much worse. The proponents of the homosexual agenda have been waging war on organized religions for years, but never quite so directly. They had better be ready for a fight, because the religious people they despise are not going to take this lying down.
    Last edited by matchlight; 06-29-15 at 06:00 PM.

  4. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    I don't think I would go as far as to have Supreme Court justices elected, for the same reasons the Framers chose not to do that. A balance has to be struck between insulating the Supreme Court from temporary political shifts and letting it be a law unto itself, as it just was in Obergefell. I think the balance the Constitution strikes is not too far off. Justices may be impeached and tried, and in the early days of this country one of them was. The Court depends entirely on the Executive Branch to enforce its decisions, and even then, no president could hope to enforce a decision if many states refused to comply with it. A president may also decline to enforce a Supreme Court decision he believes to be unconstitutional, as Lincoln did with Dred Scott v. Sandford. Or, a president may dilute the power of current justices by appointing more, as Roosevelt proposed to do by having twelve instead of nine.

    Congress can check the Judicial Branch, too. It can make laws to alter the Court's decisions--the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which weakened the effect of Employment Division v. Smith, is just one example. Congress can even make a law that completely removes the Court's jurisdiction over a case, as it did in Ex Parte McCardle, 74 U.S. 506 (1869). If interpreted broadly, McCardle suggests that Congress could in effect overrule Marbury v. Madison by not providing for the Supreme Court's appellate or certiorari jurisdiction. It is pretty clear Congress could remove the jurisdiction of lower federal courts, considering they only exist at all because it created them by law.

    Sen. Cruz may be right that we need a constitutional amendment to allow Supreme Court justices to be evaluated and removed. I haven't read the details of what he is suggesting. I think a supermajority vote should apply in any action that drastic.

    Why should the Supreme Court be insulated from the will of the very people it is meant to govern? The American People are not idiots or children, we can govern ourselves quote capably.

    The safeguards to judicial power you have outlined, while important, represent an emergency brake when what we, the Anerican Public, require, is much more involved oversight.

    I think we have a fundamental difference of political philosophy. I understand that the American People will get it wrong from time to time, just as the unelected 9 will get it wrong a lot of the time as well. History has proven both of these statements out.

    But when the cards are laid down....I would much rather ride with the Anerican People than with 9 elitist appointees who hide behind their robes and their marble walls.

  5. #95
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Oh democrats. People like you always seem to think the masses should be trusted with power because they are "wise". How quaint.
    What's quaint about democracy, may I ask? Autocratic systems are much older, and, in some cases more romantic.

    But, much as we might wish for our Supreme Court to be a King Arthur and the Knights if the round table parallel, they're really just 9 overpaid lawyers with 100 percent job security for life

  6. #96
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    47,754

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Why should the Supreme Court be insulated from the will of the very people it is meant to govern? The American People are not idiots or children, we can govern ourselves quote capably.

    The safeguards to judicial power you have outlined, while important, represent an emergency brake when what we, the Anerican Public, require, is much more involved oversight.

    I think we have a fundamental difference of political philosophy. I understand that the American People will get it wrong from time to time, just as the unelected 9 will get it wrong a lot of the time as well. History has proven both of these statements out.

    But when the cards are laid down....I would much rather ride with the Anerican People than with 9 elitist appointees who hide behind their robes and their marble walls.
    The American people voted against the freedom of others based on nothing other than personal feelings. **** em. The people had it wrong, and the court corrected it.
    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Well, certainly the customer is not an N-word.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    You know her?

  7. #97
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    27,666

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by CanadaJohn View Post
    Cruz is Donald Trump with a law degree. They will both, hopefully, not find their way onto the stage for many or any Republican debates.
    Oh actually I hope they will be in all the debates. They'll be far more entertaining that way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    I smell hosiery....
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye10 View Post
    I call my wife a slut

  8. #98
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,694

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    Oh actually I hope they will be in all the debates. They'll be far more entertaining that way.
    Yes, and at the end, the Chair of the RNC can tell them both "You're Fired!!"
    A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.

  9. #99
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 01:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Campaign

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    The American people voted against the freedom of others based on nothing other than personal feelings. **** em. The people had it wrong, and the court corrected it.
    The inconsideration with which some people so easily dismiss democracy borders on negligence. Ironically, the callousness of your response in itself makes the best anti-democracy argument thus far on this thread.

    Still, I would rather ride with the will of the people than with the will of 9 unknown, unelected lawyers

  10. #100
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    24,371

    Re: Cruz: Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage Will Be 'Front And Center' In 2016 Camp...

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    What's quaint about democracy, may I ask? Autocratic systems are much older, and, in some cases more romantic.

    But, much as we might wish for our Supreme Court to be a King Arthur and the Knights if the round table parallel, they're really just 9 overpaid lawyers with 100 percent job security for life
    I was being sarcastic.
    "We all of us know down here that politics is a tough game. And I don't think there's any point in being Irish if you don't know that the world is going to break your heart eventually."-Daniel Patrick Moynihan, December 5, 1963

Page 10 of 21 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •