- Jul 22, 2016
- 36,154
- 16,265
/—-/ Not sure what your point is. Lame Duck Joe is responsible for the first one, and the Legislative Branch has no authority over the Judicial Branch.![]()
the same rules apply to everyone.
Please clarify.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
/—-/ Not sure what your point is. Lame Duck Joe is responsible for the first one, and the Legislative Branch has no authority over the Judicial Branch.![]()
the same rules apply to everyone.
/—-/ Not sure what your point is. Lame Duck Joe is responsible for the first one, and the Legislative Branch has no authority over the Judicial Branch.
Please clarify.
a constitutional amendment has authority over supreme court. But such action requires 3/4ths of the states to approve it, which today is considered virtually impossible./—-/ Not sure what your point is. Lame Duck Joe is responsible for the first one, and the Legislative Branch has no authority over the Judicial Branch.
Please clarify.
/—-/ Not sure what your point is. Lame Duck Joe is responsible for the first one, and the Legislative Branch has no authority over the Judicial Branch.![]()
the same rules apply to everyone.
/——/ And the USSC can rule that Ethic code unconstitutional, DERP.a constitutional amendment has authority over supreme court. But such action requires 3/4ths of the states to approve it, which today is considered virtually impossible.
separately, congress has the power to enact a supreme court ethics code, which can be done using an ordinary statue.
read what i said --> a constitutional amendment has authority over supreme court. But such action requires 3/4ths of the states to approve it, which today is considered virtually impossible. I'm not very fond of repeating myself./—-/ Not sure what your point is. Lame Duck Joe is responsible for the first one, and the Legislative Branch has no authority over the Judicial Branch.
Please clarify.
/——/ And the USSC can rule that Ethic code unconstitutional, DERP.
You guys are grasping at straws again.
Well that's obviously very dumb. Just because we don't yet have good laws against it does not mean it was not corruption. Corruption is a matter of ethics, not legality.Then prosecute him. If you can't then there was no corruption, duh.
We are far to divided to get approval of both parties. The worst possible way to select judges is by elections. Rarely due voters have enough understanding of the judicial system to select judges. Politicians are only slightly better. They general have an understanding of the system but their criteria for selection will be based on political favortism. I believe the method of selection should begin with a panel of existing judges creating a qualification list. Next, the president makes a recommendation from the list and that goes to a bi-partisan congressional committee to make the final selection.The Supreme Court is already a joke. It needs changing, not in the way the dems or reps want though.
Justices need approval from BOTH PARTIES>
/---/ I read what you wrote about amending the constitution and agree with you 100%. I should have made that clear.read what i said --> a constitutional amendment has authority over supreme court. But such action requires 3/4ths of the states to approve it, which today is considered virtually impossible. I'm not very fond of repeating myself.
on an ethics code from congress --> the supreme court would only need to ignore it, if they didnt want to abide by it, but then it would make their corruption obvious to eveyone.