P@triot
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #361
Yeah. What's your point?
If there was a clear interpretation of what the framers wanted, we'd have less 5-4 decisions and a lot more 9-0 decisions.
Reality check, SCOTUS is a political body just like Congress or the White House.
That's what's wrong with SCOTUS. It was never meant to be a political body. You rights shouldn't be up for a vote. If the "consensus" determined that the First Amendment should be abolished, would you support that?
It wouldn't matter if I supported that or not.
Reality check. I think that everyone can right now agree what was done to Japanese Americans in World War II was a horrible abuse of their constitutional rights. In fact, I would go so far as to say that left and right, you'd get a pretty clear concensus that this was wrong, except for a few Neo-Con idiots trying to rationalize Gitmo. (Sit down, Miss Malkin!)
But you know what, the concensus in 1942 was pretty different. These people were terrified the Battleship Yamato was going to show up off San Francisco and start shelling the City.
And you know what, the SCOTUS totally upheld the policies.
Korematsu v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hirabayashi v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yasui v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In short, they bowed to the political reality of the day.
Pure ignorance. This is the equivalent of saying "well our founders had slaves, so having slaves is ok and should continue today". Joe, sweetie, you can't point to illegal, immoral, or injustices of the past as justification for illegal, immoral, or injustices of today.
It's very clear that a Supreme Court Justice is required to set aside their personal beliefs, and without bias, rule on whether a case before them is Constitutional. It is a very simple task and damn near every case should end with a 9-0 decision. The fact that it doesn't is due solely to the fact that Dumbocrats hate the Constitution and stack the court every chance they get with anti-American, anti-Constitutional, ignorant partisan assholes such as yourself in an attempt to further a political agenda that they are incapable of promoting through legal and proper channels (such as amending the Constitution to reflect their fucked up ideology).
Sonya Sotomayor once said "judges make law from the bench" and later apologized publicly because she realized what a monumental fuck-up that was admitting her disturbing personal view on being a judge. That disgusting little troll Elena Kagen had never even been a judge in her entire miserable life - not even a local county judge in the most rural of areas, but inexplicably gets appointed to the Supreme Court. This is the kind of trash that Dumbocrats appoint to the Supreme Court and it's undeniable proof why the checks and balances are failing (exactly the intentions of the Dumbocrats who can't win the battle by following the law).