Amy Coney Barrett - let the games begin
- Thread starter TreeFrogTrader
- Start date
I still think the fear tactic of claiming the Dems will impeach Amy for no reason even if they had the votes is comign from wingnuts, not anyone with a true reading on the subject at hand.
I also think the court packing is a fucktarded play to discuss by the Dems.....It is just as political as Trump picking an inexperienced woman who hopes will do his bidding for political reasons.
Well, first of all no one is saying that it would be "for no reason." That is not how the dem script works. The way it works is that you decide that you want to impeach someone then you come up with a reason. eg. makes the deciding supreme court vote that results in Trump being elected, overturns crockcare, votes adverse to Roe, whatever. "Show me the man, and I will show you the crime" as Beria said.
Second, it was wingnuts from your political persuasion who floated and continue to float the idea of impeaching Kavanaugh, so don't be so sure that wingnut ideas like that germinate or only flourish on the fringes. One such wingnut who promoted the idea of impeaching kavanaugh was a former Harvard Law Professor who liked to dress up and play Pocahontas.
as soon as you try and equate some wingnuts with me then I know you truly are not reading what I write....just name calling
The judicial philosophy I am into was exactly what Amy Coney Barrett testified to...
Judicial Restraint.
What I am about is low taxes and freedom and an legislature responsive to what the majority of the people demand within the constitutional framework of protecting minority rights. (We have a legislature responsive to the the groups which buy it, so my desires in that department are unlikely to be impacted much by the Supreme Court )
But, what I desire from the courts is fidelity to the Constitution. I was concerned we would get a bunch lefties on there legislating from the bench.
I think were are now much more likely to get fidelity to the Constitution.
Judicial Restraint.
What I am about is low taxes and freedom and an legislature responsive to what the majority of the people demand within the constitutional framework of protecting minority rights. (We have a legislature responsive to the the groups which buy it, so my desires in that department are unlikely to be impacted much by the Supreme Court )
But, what I desire from the courts is fidelity to the Constitution. I was concerned we would get a bunch lefties on there legislating from the bench.
I think were are now much more likely to get fidelity to the Constitution.
Last edited:
Hardly. What you’ll get is ultra right wing activists. For example, there was a recent split case related to mail in ballots in Pennsylvania. Democrats claimed victory because it went back to the state court’s decision due to a split vote. But what you’re not drilling down on was in that case was the constitutional meaning of legislature.
See, the Supreme Court needs 4 Justices to approve a case for consideration before the court. Four conservative justices decided the constitutional meaning of legislature now means state legislatures as well as federal, which it obviously does not in the Pennsylvania case.
Now with Barrett you can expect a lot more of this nonsense. These guys aren’t “originalists” they’re activists and shills. It’s going to be massive imposition on the states from issues ranging from pollution to employee safety to property rights. You have no idea what is coming. But please don’t try to pretend that these conservatives have any “fidelity” to the constitution.
Scalia’s famously activist 2nd amendment opinions were the biggest crock of shit in constitutional history. We have unlimited dark money in politics due to conservatives and our government now recognizes corporations as people and you’re trying to tell me this is about jurisprudence. I’m sorry but you are naive as a baby born yesterday if you believe that.
Calm down Sparky.
Barrett and Kavanaugh are only going to be on the bench for another 35-45 years.
I'd say packing the courts is a justified reaction to what just occurred. If you didn't want it to occur, you shouldn't allow the Republicans to rush through this nomination totally contrary to what they argued 4 years ago. The end result for the court should be a best attempt at politically unbiased decisions. Why the US allowed it's Supreme Court to become a branch of Washington politics rather then the ultimate destination for justice is a good question.
Calm down Sparky.
Barrett and Kavanaugh are only going to be on the bench for another 35-45 years.
Little longer then the week Trump has left.
Agree but what happened four years ago was the party in power in the Senate used that power to block the nomination and cmae up with a bullshit reason rather than coming out and saying "Nah we aint gonna do it because we don't want an Obama appointee".
Then while still in power they decided to still use their power to approve a nominee because the party in power makes the rules. Does not matter if GOP now looks like hypocrites with all their comments in 2016 because they were bullshitting back in 2016.
Anyone sheeple that believe otherwise just show their ass.
Sadly the Dems would have played the same game if they had the power both times so I don't give the Dems a pass. Packing the court is just a sore loser tactic for 2016 and an assumption that they will win in 2020.
As usual GOP plays it as ignorant fucks and Dems play it as children with no strategy.