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.
It would appear that most 'Liberal' judges are too smart to rule directly contrary to the precedents set by the higher courts.
Again, this is how our system works--judges make rulings everyday that they don't like..or that they don't agree with--but it's their job..and the overwhelming majority do it well.
That's bogus. Liberal judges were ruling against popular vote, legislatures and precedents all the time with the gay marriage rulings.
The Feds have no authority.... He isn't a Federal Judge.
This isn't reconstruction, with carpetbagging.
The second time... pft! he never left the 1st time. Nor will he this time. The feds have no power over a State Justice.
The problem lies in the State Constitution. Not this Judge that refuses to do jack, without amending the State Constitution.
It isn't the "Feds" that suspended Moore.
----------------------------------------
Oops ... I'm sorry ... I should have read ALL the responses to this post; so I'm just merely echoing what others have proved to be correct.
Why can't we just move on? Don't make some bogus claim Moore was right ... he was clearly wrong; no one reading this City-Data thread is a distinguished judge and scholar on US Constitutional Law making a profound case in support of Moore's conduct.
Last edited by Clark Park; 09-30-2016 at 05:21 PM..
That's bogus. Liberal judges were ruling against popular vote, legislatures and precedents all the time with the gay marriage rulings.
Judges are not bound by popular votes. The US system of justice often rules against popular opinion. We do not live in an absolute democracy; this country is a constitutional republic. Minorities are protected from the tyranny of the majority; the US Constitution separates religion from government policy.
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was passed by Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush to stop these types of emotionally-charged lawsuits against gun manufacturers. Codified at 15 U.S.C. §7901-7903, the Congressional “Findings” specifically state that businesses that manufacture, market, distribute, import or sell firearms should not “be liable for the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse” such weapons. Such civil liability lawsuits “may not be brought in any Federal or State court.”
Yet in an 18-page opinion, Judge Bellis engages in what Justice Antonin Scalia would have called an embarrassing “bit of interpretive jiggery-pokery” in order to get out of doing what the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act compels her to do – dismiss this lawsuit.
Judges are not bound by popular votes. The US system of justice often rules against popular opinion. We do not live in an absolute democracy; this country is a constitutional republic. Minorities are protected from the tyranny of the majority; the US Constitution separates religion from government policy.
No we just live in a tyranny of the minority and liberal judges.
That's bogus. Liberal judges were ruling against popular vote, legislatures and precedents all the time with the gay marriage rulings.
Sure...Liberal Appellate judges---Liberal Supreme Court judges. They were breaking new ground. It is how law and precedent work. Conservative judges have done the same.
This particular Judge acted improperly when he issued a court order directly defying a higher court ruling..that is illegal and the very definition of 'Malfeasance'.
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.