The law of the lan

[SuperDemocrat]

lets except for one moment that Supreme Court decisions are actual laws just for the sake of argument. This would mean we would have two sets of laws of this country. The first are the ones created by the legislature which, of course, is created by democracy. The other set of laws would be ones created by the courts. The courts can create one law and then completely undo that law whenever they feel like it. I don't see how the people can have any control over this because how those laws are created are complerely independent of the people's control. The legislature has to respond to the people since they hold their offices with the people's vote. The judges on the Supreme Court are not elected into office and really don't have to respond to anyone whatsoever because they have lifetime appointments. I just don't see how case law is democratic considering interpretations of the law and constitution are outside of the people's control.

Perhaps judges should be democratically elected into their position in order to give the people control over how the laws and constitution is interpreted. The people's opinion of the meaning of the constitution would be the primary guide to case law and not some weird oligarchy of lawyers. It would also be more democratic than the system we have now and it would provide a real check on the legislature since it would be a true independent branch of the government. Currently, the legislature of the United States picks the judges which means they will not pick someone who is going to strike down their own handcrafted legislation. When the choice of judges are picked independently by popular vote the legislature would lose control of the Supreme Court.

This really isn't about the popular vote of judges but more about how undemocratic case law is and it is just really an example of arbitry power over the people by the few. I predict that the same political forces that was able to convince people that case law is the law will one day convince us that executive action independent of the legislature is also the law of the land. By calling it the law of the land it makes it seem justified. Call it a direct order from the president would seem to be more like a dictatorial command. That will never be excepted which is why these kinds of actions have been renamed to law of the land. It is the only way the public will,p knowingly accept them. It just seems kind of diabolical and if I didn't know any better I would think it is being done on purpose.

 

[occupied]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

 

[Dragonlady]

The Supreme Court doesn't "make laws", it's role is to determine whether laws passed by various legislative bodies are in violation of the Constitution.

The law denying same sex partners the right to marry was found to be in violation of the Constitution.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

The Supreme Court doesn't "make laws", it's role is to determine whether laws passed by various legislative bodies are in violation of the Constitution.

The law denying same sex partners the right to marry was found to be in violation of the Constitution.

I actually didn't say that. I said that for arguments sake in order to show how absurd it is and how dictatorial it is. Are you going to,lie and not say democrats don't agree with this! If so, you have better start deleting all,the post where pro commission have said otherwise.

 

[occupied]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

Conservatives have always sought to keep power and privilege in the hands of the white protestant male landowners. This is the opposite of the people being in control of their government. Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost because "The People" actually encompasses a much larger group than the boys at the country club.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

Conservatives have always sought to keep power and privilege in the hands of the white protestant male landowners. This is the opposite of the people being in control of their government. Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost because "The People" actually encompasses a much larger group than the boys at the country club.

I totally agree. White peoples are evil capatalist that are oppressing the non whites...hay wait...how come Asians are doing so much better. I guess we haven't been doing a good job of keeping them down. I have better call the police so they can go all Rodney king on some Asian dude.

 

[HappyJoy]

The Supreme Court doesn't "make laws", it's role is to determine whether laws passed by various legislative bodies are in violation of the Constitution.

The law denying same sex partners the right to marry was found to be in violation of the Constitution.

I actually didn't say that. I said that for arguments sake in order to show how absurd it is and how dictatorial it is. Are you going to,lie and not say democrats don't agree with this! If so, you have better start deleting all,the post where pro commission have said otherwise.

No, you said the courts make laws and the legislature makes law so therefore we have two sets of laws. We don't, we have laws created by the legislature and sometimes those laws are put up to judicial review. It's all very common, constitutional and been going on for over 2 centuries.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

Conservatives have always sought to keep power and privilege in the hands of the white protestant male landowners. This is the opposite of the people being in control of their government. Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost because "The People" actually encompasses a much larger group than the boys at the country club.

You can't be a good communist if you include the rich with the people. I think we should call the nearest communist party commander and tell them of your "false consciousness" and crimes against the poor.

 

[occupied]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

Conservatives have always sought to keep power and privilege in the hands of the white protestant male landowners. This is the opposite of the people being in control of their government. Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost because "The People" actually encompasses a much larger group than the boys at the country club.

I totally agree. White peoples are evil capatalist that are oppressing the non whites...hay wait...how come Asians are doing so much better. I guess we haven't been doing a good job of keeping them down.

I thought this was a thread on why conservative bullshit laws get killed by the supreme court?

 

[occupied]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

Conservatives have always sought to keep power and privilege in the hands of the white protestant male landowners. This is the opposite of the people being in control of their government. Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost because "The People" actually encompasses a much larger group than the boys at the country club.

You can't be a good communist if you include the rich with the people. I think we should call the nearest communist party commander and tell them of your "false consciousness" and crimes against the poor.

I think we should call the loony bin and get you put back in for some more Thorazine and electroshock therapy.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

The Supreme Court doesn't "make laws", it's role is to determine whether laws passed by various legislative bodies are in violation of the Constitution.

The law denying same sex partners the right to marry was found to be in violation of the Constitution.

I actually didn't say that. I said that for arguments sake in order to show how absurd it is and how dictatorial it is. Are you going to,lie and not say democrats don't agree with this! If so, you have better start deleting all,the post where pro commission have said otherwise.

No, you said the courts make laws and the legislature makes law so therefore we have two sets of laws. We don't, we have laws created by the legislature and sometimes those laws are put up to judicial review. It's all very common, constitutional and been going on for over 2 centuries.

This is what it looks like when a liberal realizes he is wrong. He denies he ever said what he now realizes is wrong and then backtracks to the beginning with a clean slate. Interesting...

 

[SuperDemocrat]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

Conservatives have always sought to keep power and privilege in the hands of the white protestant male landowners. This is the opposite of the people being in control of their government. Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost because "The People" actually encompasses a much larger group than the boys at the country club.

I totally agree. White peoples are evil capatalist that are oppressing the non whites...hay wait...how come Asians are doing so much better. I guess we haven't been doing a good job of keeping them down.

I thought this was a thread on why conservative bullshit laws get killed by the supreme court?

Their has been very few federal laws that were ever struck down by the supreme court

 

[HappyJoy]

The Supreme Court doesn't "make laws", it's role is to determine whether laws passed by various legislative bodies are in violation of the Constitution.

The law denying same sex partners the right to marry was found to be in violation of the Constitution.

I actually didn't say that. I said that for arguments sake in order to show how absurd it is and how dictatorial it is. Are you going to,lie and not say democrats don't agree with this! If so, you have better start deleting all,the post where pro commission have said otherwise.

No, you said the courts make laws and the legislature makes law so therefore we have two sets of laws. We don't, we have laws created by the legislature and sometimes those laws are put up to judicial review. It's all very common, constitutional and been going on for over 2 centuries.

This is what it looks like when a liberal realizes he is wrong. He denies he ever said what he now realizes is wrong and then backtracks to the beginning with a clean slate. Interesting...

Wow, dude, you're nuts. What am I denying that I said?

 

[mudwhistle]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I think if honesty were the rule, the Supremes would have ruled differently.

But anything that has anything to do with Progressives is steeped in dishonesty and deception.

Simple fact of life.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

If conservatives don't like their bullshit overturned they should refrain from putting out laws they know test the limits of constitutionality. It does not take a legal scholar to know that they are going to have trouble with something that limits civil rights or just applies to a narrow demographic but they do it anyway in the slim hope that they might win the inevitable challenge. Did you catch that? They know this shit is going to be challenged and they know that it will probably fail, but every now and then they win one.

I just think the people should be in control of their government. I don't know why that is a conservative thing. I guess if progress means getting away from that then I have to wonder what is the eventual goal of "liberal" progressivism and why do they want to move us away from that.

Conservatives have always sought to keep power and privilege in the hands of the white protestant male landowners. This is the opposite of the people being in control of their government. Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost because "The People" actually encompasses a much larger group than the boys at the country club.

You can't be a good communist if you include the rich with the people. I think we should call the nearest communist party commander and tell them of your "false consciousness" and crimes against the poor.

I think we should call the loony bin and get you put back in for some more Thorazine and electroshock therapy.

Im sure that would make you feel better. I bet you go home to your mommy and cry every time you lose an argument. You then grew up and now you use electro shock therapy on anyone who disagrees with you.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

The Supreme Court doesn't "make laws", it's role is to determine whether laws passed by various legislative bodies are in violation of the Constitution.

The law denying same sex partners the right to marry was found to be in violation of the Constitution.

I actually didn't say that. I said that for arguments sake in order to show how absurd it is and how dictatorial it is. Are you going to,lie and not say democrats don't agree with this! If so, you have better start deleting all,the post where pro commission have said otherwise.

No, you said the courts make laws and the legislature makes law so therefore we have two sets of laws. We don't, we have laws created by the legislature and sometimes those laws are put up to judicial review. It's all very common, constitutional and been going on for over 2 centuries.

This is what it looks like when a liberal realizes he is wrong. He denies he ever said what he now realizes is wrong and then backtracks to the beginning with a clean slate. Interesting...

Wow, dude, you're nuts. What am I denying that I said?

Their are countless threads on this and other sites made by liberals that say that case law is the law of the land.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost

Stupidest thing I heard all week. Try reading your own history.

 

[HappyJoy]

The Supreme Court doesn't "make laws", it's role is to determine whether laws passed by various legislative bodies are in violation of the Constitution.

The law denying same sex partners the right to marry was found to be in violation of the Constitution.

I actually didn't say that. I said that for arguments sake in order to show how absurd it is and how dictatorial it is. Are you going to,lie and not say democrats don't agree with this! If so, you have better start deleting all,the post where pro commission have said otherwise.

No, you said the courts make laws and the legislature makes law so therefore we have two sets of laws. We don't, we have laws created by the legislature and sometimes those laws are put up to judicial review. It's all very common, constitutional and been going on for over 2 centuries.

This is what it looks like when a liberal realizes he is wrong. He denies he ever said what he now realizes is wrong and then backtracks to the beginning with a clean slate. Interesting...

Wow, dude, you're nuts. What am I denying that I said?

Their are countless threads on this and other sites made by liberals that say that case law is the law of the land.

You should go out and fetch some of that and bring it here.

 

[HappyJoy]

Conservatives stood on the wrong side of every civil rights issue that our country has ever faced and lost

Stupidest thing I heard all week. Try reading your own history.

Where did Strom stand?