I think dems reckless speech and actions have pissed the supreme court off royally

[tyroneweaver]

I don't expect any dem legislation on gun control to be upheld constitutionally

I think underneath kavanaugh is just seething and others might be also over they way some sc justices are being treated.

"shall not be infringed" perhaps may go beyond intended bounds, but eh, that's what ya get dems for letting someone threaten you and letting em stomp all over your peonies.

 

[1srelluc]

The dems forgot one very important fact.....Justices are just people and when you threaten a person with the full support of the dem lead .gov behind them, particularly a right-leaning one, there will be repercussions.

The right-leaning justices on SCOTUS know full well if right-leaning folks would have protested and raised a ruckus outside a liberal justice's home like what was (and is) being done at theirs Garland and his DOJ would have been all over them like stink on shit.

Deserves has everything to do with it.....Reap it dems, you fucked around and found out.

 

[WEATHER53]

You make great sense. Judges are very learned and fact based and well may have soured on the constant one way street shit show attempts.

 

[2aguy]

I don't expect any dem legislation on gun control to be upheld constitutionally

I think underneath kavanaugh is just seething and others might be also over they way some sc justices are being treated.

"shall not be infringed" perhaps may go beyond intended bounds, but eh, that's what ya get dems for letting someone threaten you and letting em stomp all over your peonies.

Also....Thomas was pissed off that the lower courts were ignoring Heller.....

 

[forkup]

I don't expect any dem legislation on gun control to be upheld constitutionally

I think underneath kavanaugh is just seething and others might be also over they way some sc justices are being treated.

"shall not be infringed" perhaps may go beyond intended bounds, but eh, that's what ya get dems for letting someone threaten you and letting em stomp all over your peonies.

I don't think you have any idea how absolutely horrendous this would be if true. A judge, let alone a SC judge is supposed to interpret the constitution to the best of his ability. What you are suggesting is that instead, these judges let their decision be ruled by their personal feelings. If that were true they are wholly unqualified for their position.

What I think is going on is that this decision is a direct result of the type of people the federalist society has put forth to the SC. The originalist idea of the constitution has a major flaw in the sense that it interprets the constitution so narrowly. Interpreting something on the narrow basis of what is in a document written over 250 years ago has by definition the flaw that the writers of the constitution couldn't fathom every issue arising in the future. This leads to the SC judges making decisions that are so out of whack with what is right that they will cause harm. "A strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means." Thomas Jefferson.

So instead of owning up to the fact that the Republicans want these kind of justices on the Supreme Court that will make decisions that will be unpopular to the point that the public might actively vote for Democrats. You are trying to put the blame for these decisions on Democrats.

You rather claim a judge is unqualified than take responsibility for putting them up in the first place.

 

[WEATHER53]

You wont find the lib loons here pissing all over this thread because the thread title is Very Threatening to them. They can’t intimidate the SC with emotion. They have already tried by being illegal asswipes and harassing the Justices at their home. Some rulings sway on the slightest of margins and thought based SC justices take Libs looney conduct and causes into account

 

[forkup]

You wont find the lib loons here pissing all over this thread because the thread title is Very Threatening to them. They can’t intimidate the SC with emotion. They have already tried by being illegal asswipes and harassing the Justices at their home. Some rulings sway on the slightest of margins and thought based SC justices take Libs looney conduct and causes into account

They can’t intimidate the SC with emotion

The OP obviously disagrees

I think underneath kavanaugh is just seething and others might be also over they way some sc justices are being treated.

What he's saying here is that the SC justices are ruling out of emotion.

 

[Dragonlady]

I don't expect any dem legislation on gun control to be upheld constitutionally

I think underneath kavanaugh is just seething and others might be also over they way some sc justices are being treated.

"shall not be infringed" perhaps may go beyond intended bounds, but eh, that's what ya get dems for letting someone threaten you and letting em stomp all over your peonies.

I don't expect this Supreme Court to have much, if any power soon. It's become necessary to rid the court of political appointments and the influence of the Federalist Society. When potential justices lie at their confirmation hearings in the hopes of overturning stated established law, the Court is no longer free of bias.

The Court is no longer representing the interests of the American people, but rather are pandering to conservative interests, placing religious rights above all. The actions of the dark money funded Federalist Society in funding and "grooming" candidates for the court, needs to end.

The rulings of this particular conservative court serve the interests of a narrow number of citizens, to the great detriment of minorities and those that religious people claim to be "sinners".

 

[WEATHER53]

The OP obviously disagrees

What he's saying here is that the SC justices are ruling out of emotion.

His emotions are referring to the misconception that SC justices operate from the same platform.
Their disdain for harassment at their home is Not emotion, it’s a fact reaction to illegality.

 

[forkup]

His emotions are referring to the misconception that SC justices operate from the same platform.
Their disdain for harassment at their home is Not emotion, it’s a fact reaction to illegality.

Which suggests an emotional and not a legal rationale for their ruling. (Not my position but that of the OP)

 

[miketx]

don't think you have any idea how absolutely horrendous this would be if true. A judge, let alone a SC judge is supposed to interpret the constitution to the best of his ability. What you are suggesting is that instead, these judges let their decision be ruled by their personal feelings. If that were true they are wholly unqualified for their position.

Don't matter if they did it to get even or not, the 2nd still says shall not be infringed. Get that through your thick head. So the ruling is correct.

 

[WEATHER53]

Which suggests an emotional and not a legal rationale for their ruling. (Not my position but that of the OP)

No. They are coming from fact of the illegal harassment which likely effects their thoughts as to the overall merits of what liberals want done. Lawbreakers trying to direct law are of no merit

 

[miketx]

The OP obviously disagrees

What he's saying here is that the SC justices are ruling out of emotion.

Don't matter the ruling is correct. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! Smoke on that.

 

[forkup]

No. They are coming from fact of the illegal harassment which likely effects their thoughts as to the overall merits of what liberals want done. Lawbreakers trying to direct law are of no merit

If their emotion on what you call illegal harassment affects their thoughts on the overall merits of a case they aren't ruling on the overall merits. Doesn't matter in how many different ways you try to state it.

 

[struth]

I don't expect this Supreme Court to have much, if any power soon. It's become necessary to rid the court of political appointments and the influence of the Federalist Society. When potential justices lie at their confirmation hearings in the hopes of overturning stated established law, the Court is no longer free of bias.

The Court is no longer representing the interests of the American people, but rather are pandering to conservative interests, placing religious rights above all. The actions of the dark money funded Federalist Society in funding and "grooming" candidates for the court, needs to end.

The rulings of this particular conservative court serve the interests of a narrow number of citizens, to the great detriment of minorities and those that religious people claim to be "sinners".

A courts job isn’t to look out for the interest of the people but to follow the law. We are governed by the rule of law. I agree that the demafasict will try to rid this court of power, they would love to overthrow the third branch all together and set up their own court…much like the national socialist did in germany…but i just don’t see that happening

 

[2aguy]

I don't expect this Supreme Court to have much, if any power soon. It's become necessary to rid the court of political appointments and the influence of the Federalist Society. When potential justices lie at their confirmation hearings in the hopes of overturning stated established law, the Court is no longer free of bias.

The Court is no longer representing the interests of the American people, but rather are pandering to conservative interests, placing religious rights above all. The actions of the dark money funded Federalist Society in funding and "grooming" candidates for the court, needs to end.

The rulings of this particular conservative court serve the interests of a narrow number of citizens, to the great detriment of minorities and those that religious people claim to be "sinners".

What? You’re serious?

They followed the Constitution so, of course, you leftists are upset

 

[WEATHER53]

If their emotion on what you call illegal harassment affects their thoughts on the overall merits of a case they aren't ruling on the overall merits. Doesn't matter in how many different ways you try to state it.

They are not reacting emotionally. They are acting factually in considering the merits of what the side is demanding who are breaking the law.

 

[miketx]

I don't expect this Supreme Court to have much, if any power soon. It's become necessary to rid the court of political appointments and the influence of the Federalist Society. When potential justices lie at their confirmation hearings in the hopes of overturning stated established law, the Court is no longer free of bias.

The Court is no longer representing the interests of the American people, but rather are pandering to conservative interests, placing religious rights above all. The actions of the dark money funded Federalist Society in funding and "grooming" candidates for the court, needs to end.

The rulings of this particular conservative court serve the interests of a narrow number of citizens, to the great detriment of minorities and those that religious people claim to be "sinners".

This is what raw communist stupid looks like.

 

[marvin martian]

I don't expect any dem legislation on gun control to be upheld constitutionally

I think underneath kavanaugh is just seething and others might be also over they way some sc justices are being treated.

"shall not be infringed" perhaps may go beyond intended bounds, but eh, that's what ya get dems for letting someone threaten you and letting em stomp all over your peonies.

When Chuck Schumer stood on the Supreme Court steps and violently threatened Kavanaugh and Gorsuch by name, then dispatched a terrorist to attempt to assassinate Kavanaugh, he had to know there was going to be a reaction.

 

[scruffy]

I don't expect this Supreme Court to have much, if any power soon.

Yeah well, you're a stupid leftie.

It's become necessary to rid the court of political appointments and the influence of the Federalist Society.

WTF?

"Necessary"?

Who the fuck are you, foreign agitator?

Stop meddling in our politics. You're as bad as Putin.

When potential justices lie at their confirmation hearings in the hopes of overturning stated established law, the Court is no longer free of bias.

I love it! A fucking leftie jackass talking about established law.

Thanks for the belly laugh.

The Court is no longer representing the interests of the American people, but rather are pandering to conservative interests, placing religious rights above all. The actions of the dark money funded Federalist Society in funding and "grooming" candidates for the court, needs to end.

You are a dumb, stupid asshole.

"Needs to"?

GTFO, meddler. You shouldn't even be in this discussion.

The rulings of this particular conservative court serve the interests of a narrow number of citizens, to the great detriment of minorities and those that religious people claim to be "sinners".

Lunatic fringe. ^^^