Quote# 116977
afchief:
One of the few on the bench who believed in our Constitution. Our country lost a great patriot and Constitutional icon. He will be missed.
I'm sure Osamabama is salivating to put another homo, anti-constitutional person on the bench. All McConnell and the Republican leadership have to do is to decline to consider any nominee appointed by Osamabama. State clearly that the Senate is exercising its constitutional power and, unlike Osamabama who presumes powers he does not have, that the power to confirm or deny a presidential appointment is at the heart of the Senate's control of the Executive Branch.
Ambulance Chaser:
What do you care? You think the Supreme Court has no power.
afchief:
They do not have any power. Brain dead liberals like you, and manipulated Christians believe otherwise.
I'm spreading the truth far and wide that we are being lied to about the role of the SCOTUS.
Let the truth be known!!!
acontraryview:
"They do not have any power. "
Then what does it matter who gets appointed?
Quantz:
What you are spreading is politely called manure, sir.
afchief:
Then prove me wrong!!!!
Guess what you can't!!!!!!!
gogo0:
if the SCOTUS rules that banning abortion is constitutional, would you still say they have no power?
afchief:
Liberals are dumber then a box of rocks. I see it ALL the time. Show me where in the Constitution it states their opinions are binding.
Waiting................................................................................................
[long citation to the Constitution]
afchief:
They have NO power, period!!!
Ambulance Chaser:
And yet, the entire country obeys their rulings. Hence, they have power.
afchief:
Then show me the law Mr. Make Believe Lawyer!!!!
Ambulance Chaser:
Sure. Right after you show me a lawyer who doesn't cite case law.
afchief:
So you are telling me "case law" IS law? Is that what you are telling me????
Where did you get that law degree from? Rocko's lawyer school for the mentally challenged liberal?!?!?
LOL!!!!
Bob Johnson:
Instead of a long cut and paste, I will point you to an online textbook on Supreme Court Decision Making -
http://www. thisnation. com/textbook/judiciary-decision.html
If after reading the article you still hold your current views, could you please point us to textbooks on American law?
This way we can both have common references for continuing this discussion.
afchief:
Instead, let's use their job description! Show me where it says case law IS law
Waiting...........................................................
[Another long copypasta citation to the Constitution]
Bob Johnson:
A shorter reply would be
Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution,
afchief:
LOL! Does it say that case law IS law. No it says their power extends to all cases.
This is why liberalism truly is a mental disorder. The law is whatever liberals think it is.
Go read this article that came out 2 days ago and concentrate on the bottom half of the article. Look up the references in the article. And educate yourself!!!!!
February 16, 2016
Did Justice Scalia Already Give Us the Solution to the Problem of Filling His Seat?
By Selwyn Duke
Ambulance Chaser:
Yes, that's what I'm telling you.
afchief:
Let's read an article that came out yesterday? Shall we? It explains in detail what I have been saying to Mr. Make Believe Lawyer. I'll skip the first part of the article and get to the meat.
[Copies and pastes an entire article]
Ambulance Chaser:
Yes, that's nice. Your long copypasta is essentially saying that American jurisprudence SHOULDN'T be as dependent as it is on case law. Not that it ISN'T dependent on case law.
Frankly, as I've said before, I have no interest in debating what American law should look like. It's an interesting thought exercise, but it has no bearing on the actual practice of law.
You keep asking me where I went to law school, and calling me a fake lawyer, implying that you believe that real lawyers understand that Supreme Court precedent serves no binding purpose. But even your own quoted article doesn't say that. It just says it SHOULDN'T.
Well, law schools teach students how to practice law not how to debate the intellectual abstractions of it. I went to law school to learn how to be a lawyer, not an academic or a philosopher. While history professors and philosophers debate the actual meaning of the Constitution, I am going to go ahead and continue practicing law as I was taught and as every lawyer, professor, and judge that I've ever met practices it.
afchief:
And yet you still do not understand that the SCOTUS cannot strike down any laws. Did you study the Constitution? Where does it state that so and so vs. so and so is law? Where? Not in the Constitution. Did you study how law is made, changed, and removed? There are ONLY two ways laws are made, changed, or struck down in our country and the SCOTUS is not one of them.
If 10 million people of a state vote for a "law" to be passed you are telling me 5 people in black robes can strike down that law? Is that what you are telling me? You learned that in law school? Really?
Sorry again, you must have went to Rocko's school for the liberal and homosexual impaired. Because you are WRONG!!!!!
afchief,
Christiannews.net 45 Comments [2/22/2016 4:27:24 AM]
Fundie Index: 22