THIS is What's Wrong With The USSC: Scalia Death Offers Best Chance in Generation to Reshape Court..

[Shrimpbox]

The dc circuit court is already accused of being way too liberal after Obama packed it with his nominees unnecessarily.

Republicans are so stupid. Whatever happened to keeping your mouths shut. Engaging with Obama is always a lose lose situation with these republican spineless lightweights. Of course the president can appoint someone and of course the senate can decide to not approve the nominee. Learn from Obama. He slow walked, obfuscated, denied documents, lost documents, lied about documents til,the issues like fast and furious, the IRS, and Benghazi dropped below the radar. You have to look earnest in public while you are totally locked down in private.

This is what you say. We will give th nominee a full hearing and then will decide what's best,for,the American people as our constitutional duties mandate.

If turtle man can't control his minions and if his minions don't understand,the necessity to remain unified shame on them.

 

[rdean]

The Court should be neutral. It isn't, hence the problem, and the very ugly fight ahead.

When courts allow unlimited money into political races and put presidents in office, they have lost neutrality. We want to get that back. Activist judges like Scalia and Thomas need to be a thing of the past.

 

[Syriusly]

Is there any chance that any Democrat or Republican in the last 50 years would seek out such a non-partisan judge? All evidence is to the contrary.

Everyone's got leanings. But, Roberts and Alito were picked on being the best and brightest of Reagan's DOJ legal analysis. Kagen was a counterweight to that, as she's a brilliant mind. Sontomayor ... her life story. Thomas, not totally different. Kennedy was more or less .... a solid conservative without an agenda. Ginsburg - choice. Breyer .... not totally unlike Kennedy.

And yet- every single one of those justices was selected because the President who nominated them believed that those justices had 'partisan' viewpoints that reflected their own.

Of course that didn't mean that they actually were- or stayed with the President's vision.

We won't know until President Obama makes the nomination but I do predict that regardless of whoever he nominates the Republican response will be that the nominee is too radical, too partisan.

Yet, I suspect that when we look back, we will see that Obama's nominee will be similar to previous nominees- a mixture of legal brilliance and experience, life story and falling into the 'solidly liberal' camp.

How can a goper not vote for this guy. He clerked for a Reagan appted circuit judge and O'Connor.

Sri Srinivasan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How?

In 2013, he was part of the legal team that presented arguments before the Supreme Court against the Defense of Marriage Act in the case of United States v. Windsor.[14]
At his formal swearing-in ceremony in September, administered by retired Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor, he took the oath on the Hindu holy book Bhagavad Gita[23

Bush's solicitor general led the charge against DOMA, and a man's religion is his own matter. If you think Olson and Kennedy are pariahs to the conservative cause, take a damn enema.

Oh I certainly don't think that either of those are valid reasons to oppose his nomination- but certainly they would be reasons why a goper might not vote for him.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The Court should be neutral. It isn't, hence the problem, and the very ugly fight ahead.

When courts allow unlimited money into political races and put presidents in office, they have lost neutrality. We want to get that back. Activist judges like Scalia and Thomas need to be a thing of the past.

That won't be tomorrow, or ever.

 

[rdean]

The Court should be neutral. It isn't, hence the problem, and the very ugly fight ahead.

When courts allow unlimited money into political races and put presidents in office, they have lost neutrality. We want to get that back. Activist judges like Scalia and Thomas need to be a thing of the past.

That won't be tomorrow, or ever.

As long as Republicans vote against their own self interest, you are probably right.

 

[Avatar4321]

The Court should be neutral. It isn't, hence the problem, and the very ugly fight ahead.

Then stop supporting people who appoint justices who ignore the constitution

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The Court should be neutral. It isn't, hence the problem, and the very ugly fight ahead.

Then stop supporting people who appoint justices who ignore the constitution

I don't.

What it actually means, the writers were not exactly sure, even as they wrote it...

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What's wrong with the Court is conservative ideologues, such as Thomas and Alito, hostile to settled, accepted Constitutional jurisprudence for subjective, partisan reasons.

 

[SwimExpert]

Our government is oppressive, bloated, corrupt and non responsible to the rights of the individual.

The Executive Branch is dishonest, corrupt and has an extreme far Left Agenda.

The Legislative Branch is just as bad because it is beholding to special interest groups and greedy voting blocks like the unions and welfare queens.

The Judicial Branch is just as political and idiotic. Just look at the case on Obamacare where the court found that the filthy ass government had the right to require that you have health insurance because it was tax and that point wasn't even argued in court. For every one they get right (like Heller) they get two wrong.

Our country is too far broke to be fixed. It is not going to be fixed by electing Republicans over Democrats and it is not going be fixed changing the mix of the Supreme Court.

This country is no longer the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

It is the Land of the Oppressed and the Home of the Illegals and Welfare Queens.

You're welcome to get the fuck out at any time if you hate this country so much.

 

[Kosh]

"Scalia Death Offers Best Chance in Generation to Reshape Court..."

'Re-Shape The Court' insinuates that the Court could be 're-shaped' to 'LEAN' one way or the other.

The USSC SHOULD be the most NON-Partisan court in the entire country, NOT influenced by any personal / political ideology / believe, etc, but should be guided purely by the Constitution.

'Lady Justice' is wearing a blindfold because everyone should be equal in the eyes of the law and justice should not be tainted by agenda, ideology, etc...

That being said, we are all big boys and girls, and we KNOW the partisan politics of the President making the pic matters a helluva lot and that said President more often than not seeks to select a Justice that leans towards his / his party's views.

Is it possible to find a judge that TRULY does not allow partisan politics / ideology to affect their ability to be a 'non-partisan' Justice?

A better question would be is there any chance Obama would actually seek out such a non-partisan Judge?! All evidence is to the contrary.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/u...in-a-generation-to-reshape-supreme-court.html

The court is not supposed to rewrite the laws that comes before them, they are supposed to claim if they are Constitutional or not. Far left judges love to rewrite the laws instead of rule if they are Constitutional or not. It is up to Congress to write the laws, it is up to SCOTUS to make those laws are Constitutional.

As much grief Roberts gets over the Obamacare decisions he is correct in the manner that the Congress needs to make the laws clear/Constitutional and not the court.

 

[Kosh]

What's wrong with the Court is conservative ideologues, such as Thomas and Alito, hostile to settled, accepted Constitutional jurisprudence for subjective, partisan reasons.

This form a far left drone that believes the Constitution is just GD piece of paper!

 

[Flash]

[Q


You're welcome to get the fuck out at any time if you hate this country so much.

I am sorry but my family has been here since the Revolutionary War and every generation of the family have fought to protect this country.

I know you hate the idea of free speech but I have the right to speak out against the oppressive government just like my ancestors did before me.

Besides, why should I leave? It is the Liberals that suck. They should leave. They are the ones that fucked this country up. Then we could return to being a Constitutional Republic with a Bill of Rights that is respected by all.

 

[SwimExpert]

I am sorry but my family has been here since the Revolutionary War and every generation of the family have fought to protect this country.

Felicitations. That has nothing to do with anything here.

I know you hate the idea of free speech

I believe what you means is that when someone says something you don't like, you lie about what they've said.

but I have the right to speak out against the oppressive government just like my ancestors did before me.

Sure you do. You also have the right to get the fuck out if you hate this country so much. What do you choose? Do you choose to take responsibility for your own happiness? Or do you want to sit around and complain about it all day like a worthless liberal?

Besides, why should I leave?

You're obviously not happy here and you very clearly hate this country and our government. So......get the fuck out. Or kill yourself for all I care. But with the way you speak about this country you gotta do either one or the other, otherwise you're a pathetic maggot.

It is the Liberals that suck. They should leave. They are the ones that fucked this country up. Then we could return to being a Constitutional Republic with a Bill of Rights that is respected by all.

How can anyone be such a sniveling weakling? You want everyone to conform to exacctly your own personal concept of correctness. And that's what you call "freedom." Seriously, you're the equivalent of cancer cells in a bowel movement.

 

[Little-Acorn]

What's wrong with the Court is conservative ideologues, such as Thomas and Alito, hostile to settled, accepted Constitutional jurisprudence for subjective, partisan reasons.

TRANSLATION: After all the liberal decisions that have ignored and violated the Constitution, I hate it that Thomas, Alito etc. keep insisting we abide by the Constitution instead of those decisions.

 

[Flash]

[Q

How can anyone be such a sniveling weakling? You want everyone to conform to exacctly your own personal concept of correctness. And that's what you call "freedom." Seriously, you're the equivalent of cancer cells in a bowel movement.

The Libtards have destroyed the concept of liberty in this country.

We have a combined cost of Federal, State and Local government that is 40% of the GDP. How can anybody have any freedom when the government takes so much of what we earn? Isn't that slavery? The Federal government by itself takes as much money away from the American people than the GDP of all but two more more countries on the planet.

We have more regulations than Carter has Liver pills. You can can't even hire or sell your home to who ever you want with the fucking government telling you who you have to hire or sell to. You can't put up a business without the government telling you how many restrooms or parking places you must have as an example. The friggin government makes you buy health insurance to their stupid Libtard standards and then requires you pay more for it than necessary so that subsidies can be given to welfare queens. The government interferes with almost every aspect of your life and you are too stupid to give a shit.

The Liberals have made America an oppressive country and if they could get away with it they would make it much more oppressive. They have made big strides in taking away freedom of religion and freedom of speech. We are only one Supreme Court Justice away from having the right to keep and bear arms taken away.

You are very confused about the concept of Liberty as are most Libtards. You really need to pull your head out of your ass.