Originally posted by LVAllen
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
SCOTUS
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by All-American View Post
Absolutely. While your at it, give me a list of all the prosecutions or disciplinary action that have ever gotten started based on violations of the Texas abortion law."I think it was King Benjamin who said 'you sorry ass shitbags who have no skills that the market values also have an obligation to have the attitude that if one day you do in fact win the PowerBall Lottery that you will then impart of your substance to those without.'"
- Goatnapper'96
Comment
-
Originally posted by All-American View Post
Absolutely. While you’re at it, give me a list of all the prosecutions or disciplinary action that have ever gotten started based on violations of the Texas abortion law.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...an-miscarriage
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/women...ths-rcna178660
Of course, this is not exactly what you asked for but women did die due to fear of disciplinary action.
Comment
-
Originally posted by All-American View Post
I mean, that's not wrong, but a government prosecutor can do a lot of damage up to and before the point of acquittal. That's one of the reasons for immunity in the first place-- to make sure the prosecutions never even get started.
For example, ordering the military to go after political opponents is an immune act now.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/08/polit...ump/index.html
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View Post
I'm just of the side that believes the much greater risk now is of presidents acting above the law and abusing their power while in office.
For example, ordering the military to go after political opponents is an immune act now.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/08/polit...ump/index.html
Anyone who bothered to has been exiled and long ago sounded the alarm. I think we now have him being managed being insidious opportunists like Vance.
Comment
-
Originally posted by BlueK View Post
I'm just of the side that believes the much greater risk now is of presidents acting above the law and abusing their power while in office.
For example, ordering the military to go after political opponents is an immune act now.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/08/polit...ump/index.html
If that is not what the people want, I don’t know that judges will save them from the consequences of their own choices.τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν
Comment
-
Originally posted by All-American View Post
The best option, of course, would be to pick morally decent presidents that would not commit criminal acts.
If that is not what the people want, I don’t know that judges will save them from the consequences of their own choices."...you pointy-headed autopsy nerd. Do you think it's possible for you to post without using words like "hilarious," "absurd," "canard," and "truther"? Your bare assertions do not make it so. Maybe your reasoning is too stunted and your vocabulary is too limited to go without these epithets."
"You are an intemperate, unscientific poster who makes light of very serious matters.”
- SeattleUte
Comment
-
"If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
"I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
"Yet I still see wisdom in that which Uncle Ted posts." -creek.
GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!
Comment
-
Originally posted by All-American View Post
The best option, of course, would be to pick morally decent presidents that would not commit criminal acts.
If that is not what the people want, I don’t know that judges will save them from the consequences of their own choices.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Maximus View Post
I thought checks and balances was supposed to save them from the consequences. It seems you are saying the scotus did indeed hurt those checks
Checks and balances are intended to protect one branch of government from being overrun by another. At the end of the day, though, each branch draws its power, however filtered, from the people. The best-designed democracy in the world won't save the electorate from the consequences of their own choices.τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by All-American View Post
Not at all what I said.
Checks and balances are intended to protect one branch of government from being overrun by another. At the end of the day, though, each branch draws its power, however filtered, from the people. The best-designed democracy in the world won't save the electorate from the consequences of their own choices.
Part of the strategy reaching all the way up to the SCOTUS is is judicial activism on the part of the Heritage Foundation. Kudos to them, it's been successful.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Northwestcoug View Post
I think it's becoming increasingly clear that a majority of voters don't care about morality in their leaders, so long as they either hate or go after the right groups.Do Your Damnedest In An Ostentatious Manner All The Time!
-General George S. Patton
I'm choosing to mostly ignore your fatuity here and instead overwhelm you with so much data that you'll maybe, just maybe, realize that you have reams to read on this subject before you can contribute meaningfully to any conversation on this topic.
-DOCTOR Wuap
Comment
-
This is fun. A lot of people are making fun of it on Twitter, but I think it's cool. Pretty wild that she was in a drama class with Matt Damon.
Comment
Comment