Supreme Court Question For Those On The Left

[meaner gene]

still waiting for you to back up your claim,,

I just posted it.
If you refuse to read the citation, then I guess I can't force you to admit I even posted it.

 

[progressive hunter]

I just posted it.
If you refuse to read the citation, then I guess I can't force you to admit I even posted it.

the republicans didnt exist then you dumbass,,

 

[meaner gene]

the republicans didnt exist then you dumbass,,

Is that how you admit the democrats were the one's to increase the size of the court, starting nearly two centuries ago?

 

[progressive hunter]

Is that how you admit the democrats were the one's to increase the size of the court, starting nearly two centuries ago?

and when in that time since has the dems tried to increase the number and blocked by repubes as you stated??

 

[Missourian]

I would rather have a court that respects legal precedent

Dred Scott was legal precedent.

Segregation was legal precedent.

Slavery was legal precedent.

Are you a closet racist?

 

[meaner gene]

and when in that time since has the dems tried to increase the number and blocked by repubes as you stated??

Jump to Apr 14, 2021

 

[progressive hunter]

Jump to Apr 14, 2021

so you lied,,, its OK I already knew you were lying,,

 

[meaner gene]

Dred Scott was legal precedent.

It still is.

It was never overturned, the decisions made in the opinion by Chief Justice Tanney, still stand.

 

[rightwinger]

Dred Scott was legal precedent.

Segregation was legal precedent.

Slavery was legal precedent.

Are you a closet racist?

interesting…

And did those Justices claim it to be settled case law when they were confirmed?

 

[Darkwind]

I would rather have a court that respects legal precedent

This one respects the Constitution over past mistakes of the court.


That is much more preferable.

 

[progressive hunter]

interesting…

And did those Justices claim it to be settled case law when they were confirmed?

case law doesnt apply to SCOTUS,,

 

[Darkwind]

This court has an agenda
They are looking to have more influence than any branch of Government
Precedence has no bearing
Consistency in their decisions is meaningless

Consistency in the application of the intent of the Constitution is the ONLY Meaning they should abide.

Past courts have been following a progressive agenda that has nearly destroyed this country by ignoring the Constitution and making up alleged legal precedent out of thin air.

 

[meaner gene]

Slavery was legal precedent.

Actually slavery was ingrained in the constitution.

Article 1 Section 9 Clause 1 | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

constitution.congress.gov

 

[Darkwind]

This is a radical court. they would overturn Obergerfell, and not care about the chaos that would become of it.

The simplest case if a gay marriage where one spouse died, and the other either inherited the assets, or the life insurance proceeds. And now that marriage no longer having a legal underpinning.

Laws overturned are treated as if they never existed, but unlike Roe, you can't retroactively prosecute an abortion. But you can retroactively annul a marriage.

No, this court replaced the radicalized court that existed prior.

 

[progressive hunter]

Actually slavery was ingrained in the constitution.

Article 1 Section 9 Clause 1 | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

constitution.congress.gov

at the demand of those that later formed the democrat party,,

lucky we fixed that problem,,

 

[Darkwind]

Saying it's not the supreme courts job is to ignore law from Hammurabi onward. Stare Decisis is important from the stability of the law. You can't have legal principles change from day to day. You could have a court that overturns Roe one day, and then reaffirms Casey the next day.

It has NOT changed from day to day. It has taken years of solid legal consideration to overturn these bad precedents.

 

[meaner gene]

This one respects the Constitution over past mistakes of the court.


That is much more preferable.

You know the Constitution has been repeatedly overturned.

 

[progressive hunter]

You know the Constitution has been repeatedly overturned.

and of course you can prove that,,

 

[meaner gene]

so you lied,,, its OK I already knew you were lying,,

I was pointing out the democrats trying to increase the size of the courts, only to be stopped by the republicans.

Grow up.

You asked for it. I delivered.

 

[progressive hunter]

I was pointing out the democrats trying to increase the size of the courts, only to be stopped by the republicans.

Grow up.

You asked for it. I delivered.

and you never proved that ever happened,,,

in fact you proved the dems for almost 200 yrs didnt try and are only now trying because they dont like a ruling,,