Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 9171819
Results 181 to 190 of 190

Thread: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

  1. #181
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges


  2. #182
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges


  3. #183
    User
    Chappy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    04-07-15 @ 01:50 AM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    2,443
    Blog Entries
    26

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Of all the decisions a U.S. Senator makes, federal bench advise and consent votes can be argued to be most the consequential and enduring. I think a little thought and consideration is completely appropriate when addressing these nominations.
    “Real environmentalists live in cities, and they visit what's left of the wilderness as gently and respectfully as possible.” — Donna Moulton, letter to the editor, Tucson Weekly, published on August 23, 2001

  4. #184
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Me too, and the more conservative, the better.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  5. #185
    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 Kal'Stang View Post
    Why? If it is because the panel isn't elected by the people then ok, what about my other suggestion? That is the people themselves appointing them. Or is there another reason?
    If you think the SCOTUS is politicized now, imagine a general election with judges running “vote for me” commercials. What a nightmare. There is a reason the framers of our constitution tried to keep them out of the political fray. Do you really want judges to be beholden to an electorate?

    "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. #186
    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
    I don't think that's an adequate solution either. After all, different cases on the same issue relies on different nuances of the law. Also, Justices and judges don't just rule on a case because of the issue - they rule on a case also on how the plaintiff and defendant frame an argument. So a Supreme Court ruling is based just as much on how a case is presented as it is based on what issue the case is based on.

    For example, there was one case brought before the Supreme Court. The issue was gun control, and the specific case concerned a law that prohibited firearms being allowed on school property. The lawyer in support of that law attempted to use the Interstate Commerce Clause to defend the prohibition of firearms in public schools. His argument was that allowing firearms in public schools could negatively affect students getting an education, which would affect the students' ability to work and earn money, which affects our nation's commerce, which Congress can regulate via the Interstate Commerce Clause. The Supreme Court struck the law down based on the argument.

    So SCOTUS didn't necessarily say that Congress can't prohibit firearms on school property. Rather, SCOTUS said that Congress can't prohibit firearms on school property by using the Interstate Commerce Clause to justify it. There's a very fine but also very clear difference between those two statements.

    So I think it would be unfair to ask nominees to judicial appointments how they would rule on certain issues when judges rule based on the argument presented to them just as much as they rule based on the issue itself.

    So that's not a clear solution either. For example, take the case I mentioned above - firearms on school property. SCOTUS said that Congress can't use the Interstate Commerce Clause to prohibit firearms on school property, and gun rights activists would support SCOTUS for this. However, if a different lawyer justified it using a different argument and SCOTUS agreed with them, then gun rights activists would talk about how the Justices betrayed their earlier decision, which isn't the case.
    This is an excellent post.

    I don’t think anyone can expect a justice to give a pre-determined ruling on the merits of a case but when asked to explain, in general terms, what their interpretations are on certain portions of the constitution, I think they owe an honest answer to all of us if they expect to be confirmed for a lifetime term in one of the most powerful branches of government.

    Some simple questions about the limitations of the commerce clause or gun control would have been appropriate during nomination proceedings to vet a nominee and assure the American public that radical judges aren’t just getting rubber stamp approval to the highest court in the land.

    They don’t have to answer case specific questions. No one can expect that. They should be obliged to answer some general constitutional litmus test types of questions however.

    "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.

  7. #187
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,880
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    If you think the SCOTUS is politicized now, imagine a general election with judges running “vote for me” commercials. What a nightmare. There is a reason the framers of our constitution tried to keep them out of the political fray. Do you really want judges to be beholden to an electorate?
    Apparently you still don't get my suggestions. There is no election. The President still nominates. The ONLY thing that is done differently is who actually confirms them, or doesn't (the "jury" or the specialist panel). The Congress can still impeach. The President still enforces...or not. Amendment process is still exactly the same.

    Basically it would add another check to the system.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #188
    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 Kal'Stang View Post
    Apparently you still don't get my suggestions. There is no election. The President still nominates. The ONLY thing that is done differently is who actually confirms them, or doesn't (the "jury" or the specialist panel). The Congress can still impeach. The President still enforces...or not. Amendment process is still exactly the same.

    Basically it would add another check to the system.
    Jury/specialist panel?

    Sounds promising. Tell me more.

    "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.

  9. #189
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,880
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    Jury/specialist panel?

    Sounds promising. Tell me more.
    Already outlined on page 12 last two posts on that page.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #190
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Chief justice urges progress naming judges

    Quote Originally Posted by GPS_Flex View Post
    The problem was created by the courts. Politically motivated interpretations of the law and the constitution have led to the politicization of the judicial branch. Until judges start strictly interpreting the law as it was written, this will and should continue.
    I couldn't agree more. This is much deeper than "petty politics" and "tit for tat" as some would say. Judicial appointments have proven to be extremely consequential to how cases are decided.

Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 9171819

Posting Permissions

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