An imbalanced former GOP senator shows ignornace of our system for balance of power

Quote from Hello:

Saying that "radical" is in the eyes of the beholder is a stupid argument. Im sure that if you had some fundamentalist muslim guy who lopped off his wifes head, and he was charged with first degree murder by the courts, that he would think the ruling was radical because he believes in sharia law.

The law is the law, and we appoint people to make rulings based on law, thus if one court is getting overturned at a higher frequency then most courts they are making rulings which do not properly represent the law, and therefore they are making radical rulings.

Do i like every every decision that the supreme court makes? No, but they are the barometer for what is and isnt radical in the eyes of the law. So if they are overruling a disproportionate number of rulings then it is because that court is not acting within the bounds of the law.
'
Im not going to continue this debate with you, because you are just going down your troll path right now to create arguments with no common sense whatsoever.
More...

I'm not sayiing this is the case but logically, it is possible that all the courts except the ninth are "radical" and this would explain why the ninth is so often overturned. Just speaking logically... please, continue!
 
Quote from Ricter:

I'm not sayiing this is the case but logically, it is possible that all the courts except the ninth are "radical" and this would explain why the ninth is so often overturned. Just speaking logically... please, continue!
More...

By definition, the position which is more radical is the one which is not accepted by the majority, thus the opinions getting overturned the most, are the radical ones in the eyes of the law.

I am not judging based on morality of decisions, or what i personally think is right or wrong, but what the law is deeming is right and wrong.
 
So when the dems took control of congress and the senate in 2006, it meant that the republicans had been radical, and Obama meant that McCain and Bush represented radicalism.

Do you see how silly your argument below is?

Quote from Hello:

By definition, the position which is radical is the one which is not accepted by the majority, so what you said is not true.
More...
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Where is it written, what you just said...

Rejecting a law passed by some state legislature as unconstitutional to the state, is making a new law?

I don't agree.

Nothing forces a higher court to take on any case, does it?

Legislatures make laws, executive branch executes (or uses executive privilege to make laws) and courts offer up opinions as to the constitutionality of the laws generated by legislatures and executive branch.

We have a process of checks and balances, nothing wrong with that.

Is it the most efficient system?

Not even close, but a totalitarian system is the most efficient...I don't think that's what we really want.
More...

You are wrong about the 9th circuit. they are wacky and overruled frequently. That is the point. Your response is non response.

I have no desire to teach jurisprudence to you, read it for yourself I am sure you would learn it quickly.
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Do you know what a strawman argument is?

You just made one...
More...
The real strawman argument here is that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is an impartial court of law.
 
No, you are wrong.

Next time, just provide a link to support your claim.

Silly, silly, silly.

Someone supposedly trained in legal research can't provide supporting evidence from a few second google search?

Quote from jem:

You are wrong about the 9th circuit. they are wacky and overruled frequently. That is the point. Your response is non response.

I have no desire to teach jurisprudence to you, read it for yourself I am sure you would learn it quickly.
More...
 
No court in this country is impartial, as the judges are not impartial...every judge has his/her own biases, so your use of the strawman below to claim something that wasn't a strawman was a strawman is duly noted...

Quote from Mercor:

The real strawman argument here is that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is an impartial court of law.
More...
 
Quote from Hello:

By definition, the position which is more radical is the one which is not accepted by the majority, thus the opinions getting overturned the most, are the radical ones in the eyes of the law.

I am not judging based on morality of decisions, or what i personally think is right or wrong, but what the law is deeming is right and wrong.
More...

I like the definition of radical I learned from Thoreau, roughly quoted, "for every hundred hacking at the branches there is but one chopping at the root."

He agrees with your distribution, but my interest is in who is getting at the root, the radical.
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

No, you are wrong.

Next time, just provide a link to support your claim.

Silly, silly, silly.

Someone supposedly trained in legal research can't provide supporting evidence from a few second google search?
More...


you want a quote... here is something that everyone with an education knows... from following the news.

"The 9th Circuit also has a long-running streak as the most overturned, which went unbroken this year. The Supreme Court reviewed 22 cases from the 9th Circuit last term, and it reversed or vacated 19 times. By comparison, the Supreme Court reviewed only five cases, vacating or reversing four, from the next-busiest court of appeals, the 5th Circuit based in New Orleans.

In other words, although the 9th Circuit decided only one-third more appeals on the merits than the 5th Circuit, it was reversed nearly five times more often."

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jul/11/opinion/oe-fitzpatrick11
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top