Quote:
Originally Posted by MMS02760
The court is being seen as more partisan and less objective by an increasing number of Americans. Its recent rulings are very much behind this.
|
Most Americans have no idea about the rulings of the SCOTUS, don't read the opinions, have no idea of the history of the judiciary and don't understand what it was intended to do. All they know is what they read in the newspapers (old people) or read in Twitter (young people).
Quote:
Originally Posted by GotHereQuickAsICould
Actually, it does matter. The power of the Supreme Court rests in the majority of Americans believing that it is the final decision on matters. If the majority believe it is nothing but a republican packed court making decisions that only a minority support, ...
|
I don't recall anyone complaining about the Warren Court, a Democrat packed court, making decisions that only a minority supported. Roe v Wade was certainly not supported by majority of Americans when it was decided.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14
It's not a lie. The SC is very far right wing compared to the majority of the country.
|
The SCOTUS is anything but "far right wing". It is actually slightly left of center despite having six Republican appointees. If you look at voting patterns, the Democrat appointed bloc almost never has swayed from the liberal position. Over the last 30 years they have voted in lock step. That is not true of the Republican appointed bloc, much to the chagrin of people who worked so hard for Republican appointees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
Mitch McConnell and Trump had a lot to do with this. Within hours of Scalia’s death, McConnell made clear no Obama appointment would get a confirmation hearing just 9 months before an election. Yet he changed his mind about confirmation hearing after RGB’s death, less than 2 months before election.
|
McConnell was merely applying the Biden Standard, since then Senate Judiciary Chairman Joe Biden said that if a seat came open in Bush's last year, there would be no hearing or confirmation.
The difference between Obama and Trump is that Obama was a lame duck President. Trump was not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
The ridiculous confirmation hearing of Kavenaugh was political theatre payback.
|
If you mean the confirmation hearing in the "last two months", that was the Barrett Nomination
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
Trump campaigned on his ability to appoint conservative justices.
|
And Biden and Clinton campaigned on their ability to appoint liberal justices. What is your point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myghost
That is because they are stacked in favor of the right, by refusing to appoint justices who were rightly nominated, and choosing to replace them. I'll give the right this much credit. Even with a baffoon leader like Trump, they were able to illegally stack the SCOTUS, and it will have effects for decades.
|
There was nothing illegal in not holding hearings on Garland and nothing illegal in confirming Barrett.
As to "justices who were rightly nominated", it was the Democrats, who for the first time ever, used the filibuster to block duly appointed, highly qualified federal judges under George W. Bush when they were in the minority and then abolished the filibuster rule for the judiciary when they were in the majority with Obama. The Democrat's partisan hackery bit them in the hiney. It will again if they try to pack the court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myghost
If they ever had a chance of staying in power, this was the only way. It remains to be seen if they will abuse their power enough to sway elections, redraw districts, and continue to dismantle the constitution in favor of these right-wing extremists. I'm not sure why they are all worried about the Taliban, they seem to support the tactics.
|
It is hard to know how to respond to such overheated rhetoric. In your bizarre little world justices who believe in and uphold, what the Constitution ACTUALLY SAYS are "dismantling it". Truly bizarre.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
We'll see. Barrett is on record as saying she doesn't think Roe v Wade is settled precedent as in no one is still discussing/challenging it or something like that.
|
Clearly Roe v Wade is not settled precedent as there are laws that challenge it constantly and Roe has been "updated" several times through Casey, Doe, Stenberg, et al.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
We all know the Supreme's can do whatever they want.
|
We know that because that is precisely what they did in Griswold, Casey, Obergefell, Bostock and many others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
They could have put a hold on the law by claiming all Americans have standing with regard to the use of the snoop/snitch/bounty hunting part Texas is using to avoid scrutiny of the law by the judiciary. Heck they could have declared themselves to have standing as the final arbiters of law in this country. They could have barred it without even ruling on the abortion part until they are ready.
|
I think they didn't place an injunction on it precisely so it will wind up before them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blondy
And, if ever a law should have been barred until it receives the full scrutiny of the judiciary this is a perfect example. It's creating chaos and irreparable harm in the lives of the women it applies to.
|
The law doesn't outlaw abortion in TX. It provides zero enforcement by government on people who perform abortions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by imbobbbb
LOL,The 'all time low' is only based on about 16 years of polling despite having a supreme court for well over 200 years. News headlines are often completely misleading.Its no wonder people don't trust the media. Its not unusual if you read a given story to find the story totally contradicts its own headline.
|
Right, there was an article on the TX NPR site that said (in effect) "SCOTUS upholds TX abortion law", and of course the SCOTUS did no such thing. They didn't even address the case, they just didn't enjoin it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RowingFiend
Liberals like OP are interested in destroying all American institutions and the Supreme Court is no exception.
|
Kind of.... the Left, who used to just be Liberals, is now driven by Progressives and Marxists.
They didn't want to destroy the SCOTUS when it ruled the way they wanted, in fact they've used the Court for 50 years to accomplish things they could not get a majority of Americans to agree with.
They hated the military and wanted to destroy it, but now that they are in control of it, they think they can use it to further indoctrinate young people joining the military on wokeness. You heard Milley's comments and saw the Enlisted Man's Reading List put out by the CNO.
The New Left will destroy what they cannot control and bend to their own uses.
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.
