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.
THe key provision here is "at common law" and "is preserved"
Historically, there have been two legal systems. Law, and equity. They had separate court systems. You had to go to one or both to get what you wanted. An example of equity is an injunction. Which was not an action at law, but of equity. So under the federal system, if you had a case that involved only equity issues (like an injunction) you do not have a right to a jury, or if you had mixed law and equity issues, only the law issues could be heard by a jury, and a judge would have to hear and decide on the equity issues.
You simply are not qualified to render opinions on the constitution if you do not know what it means.
And you are better qualified than liberals to render opinions on the constitution because.................???
THe key provision here is "at common law" and "is preserved"
Historically, there have been two legal systems. Law, and equity. They had separate court systems. You had to go to one or both to get what you wanted. An example of equity is an injunction. Which was not an action at law, but of equity. So under the federal system, if you had a case that involved only equity issues (like an injunction) you do not have a right to a jury, or if you had mixed law and equity issues, only the law issues could be heard by a jury, and a judge would have to hear and decide on the equity issues.
You simply are not qualified to render opinions on the constitution if you do not know what it means.
And what training gives you more qualification than anyone else here on the board? You very well may have the training... Law school, constitutional law specialization... otherwise, your qualification probably is the same as many others here that interpret the constitution. That is, talking points from groups that interpret it the way you like or agree with.
Maybe yes, maybe no..........the same is true of others on the website INCLUDING liberals. Unless you're willing to share your special educational edge on why we should consider you better able understand the constitution than the next guy with an interesting in reading about it, we'll never really know which side of the Knowledge Road you travel, will we. The Litmus Test for understanding the constitution doesn't depend on whether a person is liberal or conservative. It's arrogant to thing that.
Maybe yes, maybe no..........the same is true of others on the website INCLUDING liberals. Unless you're willing to share your special educational edge on why we should consider you better able understand the constitution than the next guy with an interesting in reading about it, we'll never really know which side of the Knowledge Road you travel, will we.
Because I'm a lawyer, I took con law, passed the bar. I know more about the constitution than you do, and I have proven it in this topic.
So is it possible that liberals are wrong on obamacare when they didn't know what the 7th amendment meant?
Because I'm a lawyer, I took con law, passed the bar. I know more about the constitution than you do, and I have proven it in this topic.
So is it possible that liberals are wrong on obamacare when they didn't know what the 7th amendment meant?
See, that wasn't so hard to share was it. You're a lawyer. That trumps non lawyers. But anything in the health care bill that may out of line with the 7th amendment, as you seem to be claiming, will just get tweaked out of the bill.
See, that wasn't so hard to share was it. You're a lawyer. That trumps non lawyers. But anything in the health care bill that may out of line with the 7th amendment, as you seem to be claiming, will just get tweaked out of the bill.
So you would trust the opinion of an accountant over a medical doctor on medical issues?
So you would trust the opinion of an accountant over a medical doctor on medical issues?
Perhaps I know what I'm talking about?
there are good an bad in any profession, especially true in the ego fields
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.
You're a lawyer. That trumps non lawyers. But anything in the health care bill that may out of line with the 7th amendment, as you seem to be claiming, will just get tweaked out of the bill.
