Jackson confirmed as first black woman on USSC

[Ringo]

The question is, should this country allowed to have nuclear weapons now?

 

[Lisa558]

.

If we want the Court to accurately reflect the American People ... Then why do the majority of them come from Harvard?​

No, the job of the Court isn’t to reflect the American people. It’s to determine if constitutional rights have been violated.

What has more influence over their ability to influence Law in regard to how it reflects the American People ...
Where they studied Law ... Or their gender and ethnic background?​

None, really, but then again, their job is not to influence law. It’s to make sure the Constitution isn‘t violated.

If you have to refer to someone's gender or ethnic background to make a decision ... You are part of the problem ... ​

I sure agree there!

.​

 

[flacaltenn]

I thought you were smart, but it appears that I was wrong... You want to know who a rogue judge is ? It is that POC John Robert's with his bull crap concerning Trump. Wasn't he the one that gave the cursing outburst as was reported by staff or the other judges when he was attempting to thwart justice in regards to Trump by not giving him his due right to a redress of grievances ?

If I'm wrong about the name, then correct me, but in the mean time leftist, quit covering for the Democrat's unless you've been operating undercover here as a Democrat in a conservative shirt, because you are far from being a conservative if you are ok with Biden gaslighting and race-baiting the country daily now.

No real conservative, or "classic liberal" would be advocating junking the Constitutional BASIS for an independent SupCt for one that is "elected by the people". ESPECIALLY because of ONE instance where they thought an election should JUST BE OVERTURNED.

Got any other examples of SupCt justices "going rogue"? Three over 200 yrs would be sufficient.

 

[BlackSand]

None, really, but then again, their job is not to influence law. It’s to make sure the Constitution isn‘t violated.

.

I will disagree with your idea that where someone studies Law is somehow magically eliminated in that person's interpretation of the Law.

If you are like me and would prefer a Strict Constructionist view of the Law ...
Then sooner or later you will have to accept that no matter how correct it may be, it isn't going to happen.
To me, when people have trouble interpreting the law, it's because they want it to say or mean something it doesn't.

I get your point ... But you are beating your head against the wall ...

.​

 

[Lisa558]

.

I will disagree with your idea that where someone studies Law is somehow magically eliminated in that person's interpretation of the Law.

If you are like me and would prefer a Strict Constructionist view of the Law ...
Then sooner or later you will have to accept that no matter how correct it may be, it isn't going to happen.
To me, when people have trouble interpreting the law, it's because they want it to say or mean something it doesn't.

I get your point ... But you are beating your head against the wall ...

.​

I beat my head against the wall here all the time. After all, I DO debate with leftists. I figure it keeps my mind sharp and staves off dementia!

 

[playtime]

.

I guess that only makes a difference if you care what gender or ethnic background someone has.
You are part of the problem ...

By the way ... There are only two genders.
Even with Transgenders, the person still wants to be a man or a woman ... They are not creating a gender that doesn't exist.
All the other garbage is just people that want to deny the two genders exist ... Even though they cannot refute the fact they do exist.

If you want to pander to nonsense ... No one else is obligated to follow you.

If you tell me you are a fence post ... I'll tell you to shut up, stand still and start acting like a fence post.
I wouldn't argue with you about it ...

.​

^^^

so - will you be saying something about boogers next?

 

[BlackSand]

^^^

so - will you be saying something about boogers next?

.

Yeah ... I didn't think you could offer an argument ...

.​

 

[playtime]

.

Yeah ... I didn't think you could offer an argument ...

.​

noooooooooooo.............. cause you aren't worth it. i do believe i told that once b4.

but you go girl!

again!

lol ... she's got the gig for life, so that is as they say

is that.

 

[BlackSand]

noooooooooooo.............. cause you aren't worth it. i do believe i told that once b4.

but you go girl!

again!

.

You don't need to tell me you have nothing to discuss ...
You have really bad habit of doing that.

If you have something of substance you really want to add, or anything else you want to discuss about the Topic ...
Let me encourage your participation.

.​

 

[beagle9]

No real conservative, or "classic liberal" would be advocating junking the Constitutional BASIS for an independent SupCt for one that is "elected by the people". ESPECIALLY because of ONE instance where they thought an election should JUST BE OVERTURNED.

Got any other examples of SupCt justices "going rogue"? Three over 200 yrs would be sufficient.

Don't try to spin this into something it ain't. Just like the Pope, he is a fallible man, and anyone on that court is no different. Jackson by her own words or even her word's not spoken shouldn't have been confirmed. One thing this nation is damned good at now, and that is putting radical leftist in high position's.

Any Godly person not becoming active in stopping these appointments, and then doing so by legal means is a damned liar and the truth ain't in them if they say they love America... If they say they love this country, and love it's people, and then they lie about that alledged loyalty, then yep "they are a liar and the truth isn't in them".

 

[Coyote]

First Affirmative Action Justice. No qualifications. Should have picked a Regular American.

Trump promised to nominate a WOMAN...does that mean ACB is not a Regular American?

 

[San Souci]

Trump promised to nominate a WOMAN...does that mean ACB is not a Regular American?

She is a goddam ACTIVIST. Such unpersons should not be on the Court. PS Trump had several QUALIFIED women on his list of 25.

 

[beagle9]

Race or gender should never play a role in a job resume ever ... It's all bull crap, and it has come back to bite this nation in the ace big time in many cases over time. Qualifications and character should be the only deciding line's, otherwise it becomes racial and biased towards or in favor of one's race or gender. Never a good idea.

I've always had faith that if anyone having good character and where needed they have a good education or experience, then they can succeed regardless of race or gender.

 

[beagle9]

Race or gender should never play a role in a job resume ever ... It's all bull crap, and it has come back to bite this nation in the ace big time in many cases over time. Qualifications and character should be the only deciding line's, otherwise it becomes racial and biased towards or in favor of one's gender or race. Never a good idea.

I've always had faith that if anyone having good character and where needed they have a good education or experience, then they can succeed regardless of race or gender

 

[Lisa558]

Race or gender should never play a role in a job resume ever ... It's all bull crap, and it has come back to bite this nation in the ace big time in many cases over time. Qualifications and character should be the only deciding line's, otherwise it becomes racial and biased towards or in favor of one's gender or race. Never a good idea.

I've always had faith that if anyone having good character and where needed they have a good education or experience, then they can succeed regardless of race or gender

Agree. And Biden, beholden to the Left, revealed that race and gender is more important than competence or character when he said that no whites or men would be considered for the role. The odds are 93-1 that the most competent candidate was among the whites and/or males he excluded.

Why this isn’t in violation of the equal protection clause is beyond me. Apparently, some animals are more equal than others.

She should have been disqualified when she refused to say what a woman is. Someone who demonstrates that she is so beholden to the extreme left has already demonstrated she cannot make unbiased decisions in support of the U.S. Constitution.

 

[Coyote]

She is a goddam ACTIVIST. Such unpersons should not be on the Court. PS Trump had several QUALIFIED women on his list of 25.

All three of Trumps nominations are "godamn activists". What's you point other than selective outrage?

 

[San Souci]

All three of Trumps nominations are "godamn activists". What's you point other than selective outrage?

An Activist is one who disregards the Constitution for their own political gain. Trump nominated no "Activists". PS--What BIDEN has done is the worst case of PANDERING I have ever seen. Quotes: "I will pick a Woman of Color for VP" . Quote: "I will pick a Black Woman for SCOTUS". Well ,that kinda eliminates 95% of all qualified Judges. That is Activism. Also Affirmative Action. To bad you can't see that FACT. Picking someone for COLOR is WRONG. I am sure MLK would puke at such Pandering.--Ever heard of Janice Rogers Brown? Biden filibustered her. She had the stigma of being conservative like Clarence Thomas. You Democrats want ALL Blacks to stay on the plantation and think WOKE. And black with a mind of their own is shunned. Such hypocrisy is unforgivable. Whites are NOT born oppressors. Blacks are NOT born Victims. Time you WOKE libs figured that out.

 

[beagle9]

Agree. And Biden, beholden to the Left, revealed that race and gender is more important than competence or character when he said that no whites or men would be considered for the role. The odds are 93-1 that the most competent candidate was among the whites and/or males he excluded.

Why this isn’t in violation of the equal protection clause is beyond me. Apparently, some animals are more equal than others.

She should have been disqualified when she refused to say what a woman is. Someone who demonstrates that she is so beholden to the extreme left has already demonstrated she cannot make unbiased decisions in support of the U.S. Constitution.

Yes, when she wouldn't define what a woman was, she should have been disqualified for sure.

 

[Lisa558]

Yes, when she wouldn't define what a woman was, she should have been disqualified for sure.

She could have said she doesn’t know what a baby is, or a criminal is, and she would have gotten through. If you’re a black female in this country, you’re golden.

Come to think of it, wasn’t one of the questions she was asked was whether someone convicted of a crime was a criminal, and she wouldn’t answer? Just what our country needs - a radical leftist on the SCOTUS who sympathies lie with criminals.

 

[flacaltenn]

Don't try to spin this into something it ain't. Just like the Pope, he is a fallible man, and anyone on that court is no different. Jackson by her own words or even her word's not spoken shouldn't have been confirmed. One thing this nation is damned good at now, and that is putting radical leftist in high position's.

Any Godly person not becoming active in stopping these appointments, and then doing so by legal means is a damned liar and the truth ain't in them if they say they love America... If they say they love this country, and love it's people, and then they lie about that alledged loyalty, then yep "they are a liar and the truth isn't in them".

YOUR METHODS are what's not acceptable here. And you suggested fixes that are BY ANY MEASURE not conservative values. Like JUNKING the whole Federalist/Anti-Federalist justifications on WHY the Supreme Ct should be ISOLATED from "retail politics" during their tenure.

YOU suggested term limits, and "popular election" and then you run from them. And you attack ME when I agree that the ONLY reason she is now on the court is to promote FURTHER polarization and that she is the "first black something" to sit on the Sup Ct because her mind has been given to the Woking Dead about her "womanhood"...