Is an Opinion of the Supreme Court the ‘Law of the Land’? Let’s ask Thomas Jefferson. . .

[ShootSpeeders]

Trump really dropped the ball on the kim davis issue. He said the court opinion on the case is the "law of the land" even though the constitution says only congress can write laws.

Is an Opinion of the Supreme Court the ‘Law of the Land’? Let’s ask Thomas Jefferson. . .

sep 2 2015 Did our founders, after drafting a Declaration of Independence, fighting a war with England, and then sitting down to pen a national governing document (the Constitution) put in that document the right of a majority of federal judges to make laws for the entire nation?

Robert Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice, had this to say on the issue in a Facebook post:

“Inasmuch as SCOTUS so obviously overreached and acted as though it had the power to amend the Constitution (and certainly as legislators), Kim Davis should not comply. I disagree with my friends Maggie Gallagher, Rod Dreher, and Ryan Anderson on this one. The Obergefell decision has no more validity than the Dred Scott case (or the Fugitive Slave Law) had in Lincoln's day. Civil disobedience is commendable. The only problem with Kim Davis's position (aside from the fact that she would better ground her rationale in the illegitimate action of the Five Lawless Justices than in religious liberty; h.t. Brian Troyer) is that mass resistance has not occurred on the part of Christians.”

The states have rolled over on the question of judicial supremacy, and Congress is too busy solidifying its power base to take on a nation-dividing fundamental issue. Governors don’t want to make waves and get involved in a protracted legal battle with the Federal government that has unlimited money to spend and ways to hold back federal funding (money it took from the states in taxes). Wouldn’t it be great if a dozen or so states banded together and said no to the usurpation of their states’ authority?

As I've been reminded several times, since the Constitution is the "supreme Law of the land," the Tenth Amendment is part of the Constitution:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The power to regulate marriage was not delegated to the United States by the Constitution.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

The very first words of the constitution after the preamble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states". Courts cannot write laws or repeal laws. In the kim davis case the court ordered all states to recognize queer marriage. That's a law obviously!!!

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Trump really dropped the ball on the kim davis issue. He said the court opinion on the case is the "law of the land" even though the constitution says only congress can write laws.

Is an Opinion of the Supreme Court the ‘Law of the Land’? Let’s ask Thomas Jefferson. . .

sep 2 2015 Did our founders, after drafting a Declaration of Independence, fighting a war with England, and then sitting down to pen a national governing document (the Constitution) put in that document the right of a majority of federal judges to make laws for the entire nation?

Robert Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice, had this to say on the issue in a Facebook post:

“Inasmuch as SCOTUS so obviously overreached and acted as though it had the power to amend the Constitution (and certainly as legislators), Kim Davis should not comply. I disagree with my friends Maggie Gallagher, Rod Dreher, and Ryan Anderson on this one. The Obergefell decision has no more validity than the Dred Scott case (or the Fugitive Slave Law) had in Lincoln's day. Civil disobedience is commendable. The only problem with Kim Davis's position (aside from the fact that she would better ground her rationale in the illegitimate action of the Five Lawless Justices than in religious liberty; h.t. Brian Troyer) is that mass resistance has not occurred on the part of Christians.”

The states have rolled over on the question of judicial supremacy, and Congress is too busy solidifying its power base to take on a nation-dividing fundamental issue. Governors don’t want to make waves and get involved in a protracted legal battle with the Federal government that has unlimited money to spend and ways to hold back federal funding (money it took from the states in taxes). Wouldn’t it be great if a dozen or so states banded together and said no to the usurpation of their states’ authority?

As I've been reminded several times, since the Constitution is the "supreme Law of the land," the Tenth Amendment is part of the Constitution:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The power to regulate marriage was not delegated to the United States by the Constitution.

Time to start dealing with reality now. The Supreme Court has the final say on what is or isn't constitutional. Just deal with it, the rest of us do.

 

[Zander]

Parse, dissect, examine.

Analyze, inspect, scrutinize.

Study, evaluate, review.

Every word that Trump says!!

He rules all Media!!

 

[bodecea]

The very first words of the constitution after the preamble are "all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states". Courts cannot write laws or repeal laws. In the kim davis case the court ordered all states to recognize queer marriage. That's a law obviously!!!

Yes...the Legislative Powers fall to the Legislative Branch....so....tell us what law the Supreme Court created. What is that law's name and statute number?

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Time to start dealing with reality now. The Supreme Court has the final say on what is or isn't constitutional. Just deal with it, the rest of us do.

That's what liberals always say. When someone asks why the courts are allowed to write laws when the constitution says only congress can, they say - that's just how we do things. HAHAHA. Liberals are so pathetic.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Yes...the Legislative Powers fall to the Legislative Branch....so....tell us what law the Supreme Court created.

They wrote a law saying all states must recognize queer marriage. It's been all over the news, doofus.

 

[bodecea]

Yes...the Legislative Powers fall to the Legislative Branch....so....tell us what law the Supreme Court created.

They wrote a law saying all states must recognize queer marriage. It's been all over the news, doofus.

"They wrote a law"....so, all laws are required to have statute #s and be codified. What is the # of that law that SCOTUS wrote? Perhaps you can show us a copy of its terminology.

(to those in the know...please don't spoil the fun I'm having with this idiot)

 

[JakeStarkey]

ss, the clerk denied equal access to government services.

 

[WinterBorn]

The SCOTUS can not write law. But they CAN rule on the constitutionality of laws. And that is what they did. They ruled that the laws forbidding same sex marriage were unconstitutional. Without those laws, same sex marriage is legal.

 

[bodecea]

The SCOTUS can not write law. But they CAN rule on the constitutionality of laws. And that is what they did. They ruled that the laws forbidding same sex marriage were unconstitutional. Without those laws, same sex marriage is legal.

HEY! I asked you not to ruin my fun!!!!!!

 

[WinterBorn]

The SCOTUS can not write law. But they CAN rule on the constitutionality of laws. And that is what they did. They ruled that the laws forbidding same sex marriage were unconstitutional. Without those laws, same sex marriage is legal.

HEY! I asked you not to ruin my fun!!!!!!

Oh. Sorry.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Time to start dealing with reality now. The Supreme Court has the final say on what is or isn't constitutional. Just deal with it, the rest of us do.

That's what liberals always say. When someone asks why the courts are allowed to write laws when the constitution says only congress can, they say - that's just how we do things. HAHAHA. Liberals are so pathetic.

They didn't write a law, they tossed out unconstitutional ones. That's in their job description.

Bet you don't mind it when they toss out anti-gun laws eh? Just anti-gay laws...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Yes...the Legislative Powers fall to the Legislative Branch....so....tell us what law the Supreme Court created.

They wrote a law saying all states must recognize queer marriage. It's been all over the news, doofus.

No, they said that all anti-gay marriage laws are unconstitutional. Not the same thing.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Time to start dealing with reality now. The Supreme Court has the final say on what is or isn't constitutional. Just deal with it, the rest of us do.

That's what liberals always say. When someone asks why the courts are allowed to write laws when the constitution says only congress can, they say - that's just how we do things. HAHAHA. Liberals are so pathetic.

so is the poster named shootspeeders......oh sorry....

 

[aaronleland]

The SCOTUS can not write law. But they CAN rule on the constitutionality of laws. And that is what they did. They ruled that the laws forbidding same sex marriage were unconstitutional. Without those laws, same sex marriage is legal.

HEY! I asked you not to ruin my fun!!!!!!

Oh. Sorry.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Yes...the Legislative Powers fall to the Legislative Branch....so....tell us what law the Supreme Court created.

They wrote a law saying all states must recognize queer marriage. It's been all over the news, doofus.

they did not write anything,they made a ruling about a law....if you cant handle that then try and change it.....

 

[Katzndogz]

Parse, dissect, examine.

Analyze, inspect, scrutinize.

Study, evaluate, review.

Every word that Trump says!!

He rules all Media!!

Almost like he's already president.

 

[JakeStarkey]

 

[danielpalos]

Trump really dropped the ball on the kim davis issue. He said the court opinion on the case is the "law of the land" even though the constitution says only congress can write laws.

Is an Opinion of the Supreme Court the ‘Law of the Land’? Let’s ask Thomas Jefferson. . .

sep 2 2015 Did our founders, after drafting a Declaration of Independence, fighting a war with England, and then sitting down to pen a national governing document (the Constitution) put in that document the right of a majority of federal judges to make laws for the entire nation?

Robert Gagnon, Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary and author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice, had this to say on the issue in a Facebook post:

“Inasmuch as SCOTUS so obviously overreached and acted as though it had the power to amend the Constitution (and certainly as legislators), Kim Davis should not comply. I disagree with my friends Maggie Gallagher, Rod Dreher, and Ryan Anderson on this one. The Obergefell decision has no more validity than the Dred Scott case (or the Fugitive Slave Law) had in Lincoln's day. Civil disobedience is commendable. The only problem with Kim Davis's position (aside from the fact that she would better ground her rationale in the illegitimate action of the Five Lawless Justices than in religious liberty; h.t. Brian Troyer) is that mass resistance has not occurred on the part of Christians.”

The states have rolled over on the question of judicial supremacy, and Congress is too busy solidifying its power base to take on a nation-dividing fundamental issue. Governors don’t want to make waves and get involved in a protracted legal battle with the Federal government that has unlimited money to spend and ways to hold back federal funding (money it took from the states in taxes). Wouldn’t it be great if a dozen or so states banded together and said no to the usurpation of their states’ authority?

As I've been reminded several times, since the Constitution is the "supreme Law of the land," the Tenth Amendment is part of the Constitution:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The power to regulate marriage was not delegated to the United States by the Constitution.

Only infidels, protestants, and renegades have a problem with Article 4, Section 2 of our supreme law of the land.