Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

...or who endorses that law.

Posted on: April 24, 2018 at 13:31:24 CT
ummmm MU
Posts:
44902
Member For:
13.46 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
In the event the 9 robed politicians interpret the Constitution as allowing for that law.

By the way, the Supreme Court has already curtailed jury "rights" in some of its decisions.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

7 openings on 9th Circuit Court of Appeals - Spanky KU - 4/24 10:46:54
     Are you not confident his House and Senate majorities will - TigerJackSwartz MU - 4/24 11:12:33
          House? no - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:41:59
     What does the house have to do with it? - tigerdb MU - 4/24 11:11:48
          The public servants are in recess for half the summer? - ummmm MU - 4/24 11:13:11
               probably do less damage when out of DC, than when they're - tigerdb MU - 4/24 11:55:02
                    Maybe in schoolhouse rock they do that. (nm) - ummmm MU - 4/24 11:58:29
                    yeah, that's what they do when not in DC - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:57:19
                         You're really struggling teetee - tigerdb MU - 4/24 12:04:20
                              yeah, that's what they will do when not in DC - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:06:27
     What do you mean? Don't these people just interpret - ummmm MU - 4/24 10:58:26
          I can't find the judicial review clause in the Constitution. - TigerMatt STL - 4/24 11:07:18
               You don't want to find it - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:21:58
                    RE: You don't want to find it - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:49:28
                    RE: You don't want to find it - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:34:13
                    Not even those who believe in judicial review will - TigerMatt STL - 4/24 11:34:02
                         It is an implied power - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:51:50
                              Federalist 78 was written by Alexander Hamilton who did - ummmm MU - 4/24 12:00:41
                                   RE: Federalist 78 was written by Alexander Hamilton who did - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:05:34
                                   BUT IT'S A LINK!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND HE'S AN AUTHORITY - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:05:03
                              and if it is an implied power, why did you quote the constit - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:53:02
                              RE: It is an implied power - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:52:29
                                   Was that question intended for me to answer? You posted - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:57:54
                                        lmfao "merely served to affirm" - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:04:29
                                             You ignored almost ALL of my post.. - Spanky KU - 4/24 12:15:37
                                                  Those professors should start with a plain reading of the - ummmm MU - 4/24 12:32:17
                                                  RE: You ignored almost ALL of my post.. - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:23:47
                                                       "In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court - Spanky KU - 4/24 12:25:15
                                                            is that supposed to be where the power of judicial review - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:27:07
                                                  Because John Yoo and Saikrishna Prakash aren't - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:20:48
                                                       RE: Because John Yoo and Saikrishna Prakash aren't - Spanky KU - 4/24 12:25:55
                                                            RE: Because John Yoo and Saikrishna Prakash aren't - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:27:18
                                                                 Read! - Spanky KU - 4/24 12:35:57
                                                                      and yet you still claim it is only "implied" and requires - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:41:40
                                                                      and still it didn't make it into the constitution (nm) - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 12:40:01
                                                                      And yet, it was not included in the actual Constitution - ummmm MU - 4/24 12:37:21
                                                                           The nation disagrees with you - Spanky KU - 4/24 12:51:16
                                                                                lol and there we have it!, the laydown, spanky style (nm) - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 13:01:55
                                                                                     No laydown... You are wrong and no-one agrees with you - Spanky KU - 4/24 13:23:08
                                                                                          ...or who endorses that law. - ummmm MU - 4/24 13:31:24
                                                                                          You in this thread: - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 13:31:19
                                                                                          you've rather embarrassingly made the point (nm) - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 13:29:03
                                                                                argumentum ad populum (nm) - TigerMatt STL - 4/24 12:54:05
                                                                                No way. The benefactors of the power grab disagree with - ummmm MU - 4/24 12:53:37
                         If it is in the constitution, what was the importance of M v - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:34:50
                              Home run trot? (nm) - ummmm MU - 4/24 11:45:55
                                   just waiting for Spanky, the constitutional scholar to - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:49:51
                              That case also shows the political hackery of the court - TigerMatt STL - 4/24 11:39:34
                    cases - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:33:59
               It's right below the clause that authorizes the President - ummmm MU - 4/24 11:10:18
                    Oh yeah, by the Exceptions to the 2nd Amendment clause.(nm) - TigerMatt STL - 4/24 11:35:13
          Not those that are appointed by Democrats - Spanky KU - 4/24 10:59:09
               Hmm... I thought judges just followed the law. (nm) - ummmm MU - 4/24 11:09:21
               LOL - mizzoumurfkc MU - 4/24 11:03:57
               Lol like John Roberts? The Obamacare deciding vote.(nm) - El-ahrairah BAMA - 4/24 11:02:02
                    why was roberts' vote "the deciding" vote - didn't the other - 90Tiger MU - 4/24 11:07:03
                         It's as if he didn't think before posting that - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:08:26
                    What makes Roberts the deciding vote? - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:04:59
                         I guess he wasn’t the deciding vote - El-ahrairah BAMA - 4/24 12:28:13
                         Maybe not the deciding vote, but he did write the majority - ummmm MU - 4/24 11:08:47
                              So not the deciding vote. Got it - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:22:33
                                   As I just indicated, yes. (nm) - ummmm MU - 4/24 11:36:20
     Chuck schemer permitted the sec of state to be confirmed. He - hokie VT - 4/24 10:52:28
          He will curse Dirty Harry for invoking the Nuclear Option - Spanky KU - 4/24 11:04:02




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard