Page 14 of 19 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 190

Thread: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

  1. #131
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:00 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,341
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    You are playing semantics here while coming full circle and contradicting yourself. You say there is no such thing as “legislating from the bench”, then you say the constitution is supposed to “evolve” through judicial interpretation???



    I really don’t care what you call it and I really don’t care if SCOTUS has done it in the past. If the SCOTUS makes de facto changes to the constitution, that is “legislating from the bench” and it is subversion of the constitution. Maybe we can agree on some basic principles though.

    Would you agree that all power not delegated to the federal government was, and still is, reserved to the states and the people?

    Do you agree that the framers of the constitution intended to have the judicial branch of government remain as non-political as possible?
    SCOTUS is not making defacto changes to the constitution. They are interpreting the constitution. This is a large, unsubtle difference. The only people who cry and whine about legislating from the bench and activist judges are those who disagree with how the judges interpreted the constitution.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  2. #132
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    No. SCOTUS doesn't have the power to grant or not grant rights. Rather, they have the power to clarify rights since the Constitution admits it does not exhaustively list all rights people have.
    I agree completely. There is no such thing as a constitutional right. They are God given rights. The only rights that the constitution grants are the powers granted to the federal government by the people.

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  3. #133
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    I agree completely. There is no such thing as a constitutional right. They are God given rights. The only rights that the constitution grants are the powers granted to the federal government by the people.
    Or, rather than God-given rights, natural rights.

    However, sometimes natural rights interfere with each other, such as freedom of speech vs. freedom for public safety (yelling "fire" in a theater). For this, we have the Supreme Court to balance those rights through the rulings they make.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  4. #134
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    SCOTUS is not making defacto changes to the constitution. They are interpreting the constitution. This is a large, unsubtle difference. The only people who cry and whine about legislating from the bench and activist judges are those who disagree with how the judges interpreted the constitution.
    You are talking in circles again. Please provide a link to your earlier referenced rulings by SCOTUS that show how the constitution evolves in ways other than the amendment process. Maybe then I’ll get a better idea of where you are actually coming from.

    As for “the only people who whine and cry”…: To interpret is to tell the meaning of something. If we ask the courts to interpret the word “dog” into Spanish and the court, being dominated by cat loving dog haters, tells us that it means “el gato” (the Spanish word for cat), they have clearly, and intentionally, not interpreted the word “dog”. Now, if this court is the final arbiter on the Spanish and English languages, they have superseded the previous meaning of the word and created a new definition.

    This would be de facto legislation because only congress has the power to create new words or redefine old ones. It would be a different story if there were numerous Spanish words for dog and the courts didn’t choose the one I preferred.

    So, in summary, when a judge knowingly misinterprets, redefines or creates something new where there was nothing, in an effort to affect an outcome that is contrary to what the constitution clearly says, that is an act of legislating from the bench and, as our friend danareah has so eloquently pointed out already, those judges should hang up their robes and go run for political office.

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  5. #135
    Guru
    GPS_Flex's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    02-11-17 @ 11:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    Or, rather than God-given rights, natural rights.

    However, sometimes natural rights interfere with each other, such as freedom of speech vs. freedom for public safety (yelling "fire" in a theater). For this, we have the Supreme Court to balance those rights through the rulings they make.
    I don't have a problem with that. God given or Natural given, either one works for me.

    "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
    John F. Kennedy
    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    It would seem that the constitution is just a god damn piece of paper, to be trotted out when expedient.

  6. #136
    Sage
    SheWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,512

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Chief justice urges progress naming judges - Yahoo! News



    I don't agree with Roberts often, but when he is right, he is right. This is not a republican or democrat issue. Both do it. It is also a fairly important issue. We need to get enough judges out there as people do have a right to timely justice. We have to stop playing petty politics with every god damned thing and start working to do what is right. This is true for republicans and democrats alike.
    I know a lot of republicans want to block pretty much everything Obama does... but I seriously doubt the people in their districts are keeping track of all their votes and will look up their votes on stuff like this. I really don't understand why they think this crap going to help or benefit them... it's just politics like you said.

  7. #137
    It's Just Boris.
    Bassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    West end of the Erie Canal (That's Buffalo, NY for those of you in Rio Linda)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,699

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    No actually it is a Republican vs. Democrat issue. During the pre-9/11 period of the Bush Presidency, the Democrat minority did nothing but stonewall all of Bush's judicial picks.


    11/8/16: A day of great relief for America

  8. #138
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    64,053

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    It’s pretty simple actually. You said:

    Your definition of “evolve”, as it relates to the constitution, is wrong if you think it was left intentionally vague to allow for liberal interpretations thereof. Why would the founders provide for amendments to the constitution if they intended to give judges the power to amend it?
    ahhh... you said "results from Amendments", yeah, that was pretty clear, my bad.

    I take it that you think that freedom of speech applies only to speech then, and not expression? That one could yell "bomb under my seat" in a darkened movie theatre too? It says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech".

    So, making a law against hate speech is unConstitutional, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by OldFatGuy View Post
    Usually a gag for wise mouthed insulting little girls. Then some good nylon rope so I can tie them up, toss them in the trunk of my car and forget about them.

  9. #139
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Dakota
    Last Seen
    09-02-17 @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,357

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    your error was suggesting that the 9th and 10th amendments were designed to allow courts to "create rights" while that has happened that certainly was not the intent
    I believe you two are wrong for focusing on the 9th and 10th amendments. For example, the "right to privacy" was found to be a form of substantive due process. It is part of the 14th amendment. This is also true when applying any form of the bill of rights to states.

  10. #140
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo View Post
    Those Republicans who vote to confirm any Obama judicial nominations must figuratively die a political death. Cooperation means death.
    It's that kind of backwards thinking that is ruining this country.

Page 14 of 19 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... 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
  •