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.
Like all other legislation, it should take a 2/3rd ruling from the supreme court to be a decision. not 5/9ths.
But better yet, it should be a 9-0 ruling to take our liberty.
Making most of what is politically motivated and not based upon securing our rights, null and void!
It depends on what a decision is being made on, some things just need a simple majority. Asking for an all or nothing rule would literally cripple all of society.
Like all other legislation, it should take a 2/3rd ruling from the supreme court to be a decision. not 5/9ths.
But better yet, it should be a 9-0 ruling to take our liberty.
your opinion is noted, however its completely unwise. Its a wish for chaos and a FAILURE to get anything done. You wont preserve your rights, you will lose them in sections of the US.
Majority decisions are the way to go, the politicizing of the court is the travesty. We need to not require a 60 vote win either in the Senate. Thats a rules change the conservatives should have done day 1.
Seriously, non majority requirements sound good, but realistically often aren't.
Like all other legislation, it should take a 2/3rd ruling from the supreme court to be a decision. not 5/9ths.
But better yet, it should be a 9-0 ruling to take our liberty.
Making most of what is politically motivated and not based upon securing our rights, null and void!
It should be removal from Office and rescinding that decision too.
It depends on what a decision is being made on, some things just need a simple majority. Asking for an all or nothing rule would literally cripple all of society.
It would cripple the over reach of government and the liberties it has taken in bulk, not society.
your opinion is noted, however its completely unwise. Its a wish for chaos and a FAILURE to get anything done. You wont preserve your rights, you will lose them in sections of the US.
Majority decisions are the way to go, the politicizing of the court is the travesty. We need to not require a 60 vote win either in the Senate. Thats a rules change the conservatives should have done day 1.
Seriously, non majority requirements sound good, but realistically often aren't.
I suppose the entire reason for the 2/3rd rules has been lost on many.
Like this example of the violent conflicts, 50.1% telling 49.9% what to do, or face punishment.
Mob rule, places the minority into bondage of the majority. War is the only solution.
It would cripple the over reach of government and the liberties it has taken in bulk, not society.
It would likely have the opposite effect. Government could enact laws to take away your freedoms and those laws would stand with no hope of constitutional challenge. Much of the business before the court is questions on the limits of government.
It would likely have the opposite effect. Government could enact laws to take away your freedoms and those laws would stand with no hope of constitutional challenge. Much of the business before the court is questions on the limits of government.
If it did not receive enough support, it would default to be unconstitutional and in favor of the people to retain our liberty..... Not Constitutional. Things are not challenged in the courts, because the people think they are Constitutional.
The American people get the Justices they deserve when they elect their President.
What forces the people to consent to 9 government appointed employees, opinions?
We know what forces them to comply.
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.