« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: If I were arguing the case before the supreme court  (Read 1094 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dutch508

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12580
  • Reputation: +1733/-1068
  • Remember
If I were arguing the case before the supreme court
« on: May 12, 2020, 01:21:27 PM »
Quote
shockey80 (3,753 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213428349

If I were arguing the case before the supreme court, I would have asked this question.
Why is the supreme court taking up a case that is already settled law? This case should have made it to the supreme court. Taking up this case demeans the court.

Quote
sfstaxprep (398 posts)

2. Because They Want To Overturn That Precedent

At least when it involves a repub "president."

Quote
PoliticAverse (21,688 posts)

5. If it is "settled law", cite the Supreme Court case. n/t

Quote
Ms. Toad (21,497 posts)

9. Nothing is settled law, as to the supreme court.

While they generally apply stare decisis, part of the point of having a single supreme court is that the right to recognize new interpretations/understandings of the law (binding on all LOWER courts belongs to them).

After all, racial segregation was settled law at one time. So was locking Japanese Americans in internment camps. Did the court demean itself by taking up Brown v. Board of Education?

 :whatever:
Logged
The torch of moral clarity since 12/18/07

2016 DOTY: 06 Omaha Steve - Is dying for ****'s face! How could you not vote for him, you heartless bastards!?!

Offline SVPete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29501
  • Reputation: +3266/-248
Re: If I were arguing the case before the supreme court
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2020, 01:32:03 PM »
Quote
shockey80 (3,753 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213428349

If I were arguing the case before the supreme court, I would have asked this question.
Why is the supreme court taking up a case that is already settled law? This case should have made it to the supreme court. Taking up this case demeans the court.

Ignoring the fact that shockey80 accidentally omitted a word in his second sentence, "settled laws" are challenged in the USSC very frequently ... and are overturned. More briefly, :-) , DU-Loon-in-Chief shockey80 would lose.
Logged
If The Vaccine is deadly as anti-Covid-vaxxers claim, millions now living would have died.

Offline ADsOutburst

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5242
  • Reputation: +1606/-13
Re: If I were arguing the case before the supreme court
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2020, 01:43:29 PM »
Quote
shockey80 (3,753 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213428349

If I were arguing the case before the supreme court...
...this would be the expression on Chief Justice Roberts' face:


Logged

Offline Skul

  • Sometimes I drink water just to surprise my liver
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12475
  • Reputation: +914/-179
  • Chief of the cathouse
Re: If I were arguing the case before the supreme court
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2020, 03:32:17 PM »
Quote from: ADsOutburst on May 12, 2020, 01:43:29 PM
...this would be the expression on Chief Justice Roberts' face:

Not a to mention, Justices Sotomayor and Kagan.
Justice Ginsburg would be slowly hobbling over
in order to bitch slap that pretentious son of a beach.
     Justice Kavanaugh ‐--‐‐> :bird:
The remaining five justices ------> :lmao:
Logged
Then-Chief Justice John Marshall observed, “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.”

John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »