Take Clarence Thomas down now. (employment, health care, death, crime)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A good man?
Anita Hill, current conflict of interest, lied on mandatory disclosure forms, etc.
Tell me, what has he done that makes him "good man" and, a better question, a "good justice"?
Your post makes no sense. What kind of communist leader will be on the bench? What ones are there now?
That would require honesty.
Was the Anita Hill issue ever proven? On the contrary, it was pretty much proven to be bogus...
All I hear from liberals.... Clarence Thomas... conservative... hate, hate, hate, hate... try to get a liberal judge in... get an activist liberal judge since Obama is president... hate, hate, hate... I am going to shed a tear for you liberals....
Sorry, I'm not your research assistant. You made the claim and it's not up to me to verify your assertions. If you refuse, we can only conclude that your claim has no basis in fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
See post 16, of course you are wrong.
Actually, I an not wrong. This is from your own source:
Quote:
In Lawrence vs. Texas, the court relied most fundamentally on the U.S. Constitution's right of privacy to strike down laws prohibiting oral and anal sex between consenting adults of the same sex. But it also emphasized the "values we share with a wider civilization" and how privacy for gay men and lesbians "has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom in many other countries."
You are making the absurd argument that it's illegitimate for the court to mention reasoning based in foreign law. Apart from what this article says, doing so, has been happening for decades.
The U.S. is not a vacuum and was formed based upon laws, principals and political ideas stemming from Europe and Greece. The SCOTUS commonly references English common law. Even in Roe v. Wade, (1973) the court weighed "what that history reveals about man's attitudes toward the abortion procedure over the centuries." It mentioned the Hippocratic Oath. It cited, "A loose consensus evolved in early English law that these events occurred at some point between conception and live birth. "
Anyone who knows court rulings knows that courts typically cite references from foreign courts but base their rulings on U.S. constitutional law. The case in question does just that and is contrary to the assertion that, "2 of the 3 looney tune libs use foreign law to make decisions for us." As stated, citing foreign legal precedent has been a common practice under many courts.
Actually, I an not wrong. This is from your own source:
You are making the absurd argument that it's illegitimate for the court to mention reasoning based in foreign law. Apart from what this article says, doing so, has been happening for decades.
The U.S. is not a vacuum and was formed based upon laws, principals and political ideas stemming from Europe and Greece. The SCOTUS commonly references English common law. Even in Roe v. Wade, (1973) the court weighed "what that history reveals about man's attitudes toward the abortion procedure over the centuries." It mentioned the Hippocratic Oath. It cited, "A loose consensus evolved in early English law that these events occurred at some point between conception and live birth. "
Anyone who knows court rulings knows that courts typically cite references from foreign courts but base their rulings on U.S. constitutional law. The case in question does just that and is contrary to the assertion that, "2 of the 3 looney tune libs use foreign law to make decisions for us." As stated, citing foreign legal precedent has been a common practice under many courts.
Of course you are wrong, simply admit it and move along. Foreign law was used to decide the case. You contended that didn't happen. You clearly had no idea this happened.
As a reminder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
Can you provide examples of your claim? What foreign laws? Or is that just something Rush said and now you are regurgitating it.
From the link.
"Never before had the Supreme Court's majority cited a foreign legal precedent in such a big case. Kennedy's opinion in Lawrence vs. Texas, which was signed by four other justices, has ignited a debate among analysts over whether it was a signal that the justices will adopt foreign courts' views of individual liberties."
"Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer have been the most enthusiastic justices in giving consideration to foreign legal trends. In voting last month to uphold an affirmative action policy at the University of Michigan, Ginsburg, joined by Breyer, highlighted an international treaty that endorsed the use of race-conscious programs to help minorities."
All of you liberals just hate him because you're racists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigHouse9
Agreed, all liberals who want him out are racists!!!
You have a right to your opinion but your opinion must pass some minor level of scrutiny in order to be credible.
The fact is that Thomas' ethics are questionable. That's not even in dispute. He lied on his financial disclosures among other things. That's a violation of law.
To claim questioning a law breaker's ethics is racist is quite laughable and not worthy of belief. Abe Fortas resigned the court for lesser infractions.
When ANY leftist group turns down Soros money, come back.
For some reason, they never include this guy in their rants about "money" in politics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech
The fact is that Thomas' ethics are questionable. That's not even in dispute. He lied on his financial disclosures among other things. That's a violation of law.
To claim questioning a law breaker's ethics is racist is quite laughable and not worthy of belief. Abe Fortas resigned the court for lesser infractions.
I guess you missed the news as well. He is not required to disclose the amount.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
