User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:21:03 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Latin phrase is "stare decisis." It is a principle of giving deference to prior opinions, but there are numerous examples of the Court overturning prior decisions. Once a decision is rendered it is not thereafter forever engraved in stone. See, for example, Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education. Kennedy leaving isn't a huge win in my mind. The vast majority of the time he casts his vote against government restrictions. Some call him left-leaning because when he applies this to things like gay marriage he says government shouldn't be able to restrict two consenting adults from calling themselves married and, therefore, if the state is going to recognize marriages it has to recognize them all. But he also was on the pro-gun side in Heller and McDonald, he votes for limiting search and seizure, is dubious of government overreach in things like environmental protection regulations, riled the "liberals" by voting against government restrictions on speech in Citizens United, etc. Edit: I can't think this morning. It was important to know which way the wind was blowing that day to try to figure out what Kennedy was going to do. To me, Constitutional law should be taken from an understanding of, first, the actual language of the Constitution, and second, an understanding of what the Founders intended when the Constitution was passed. To him, Constitutional interpretation was what he thought was good policy for the country. Sounds like a good idea, huh? Maybe for a legislator, not for a Supreme Court Justice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:21:07 AM EDT
[#2]
I'm not tired of the WINNING yet, anyone else?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:22:15 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope we stack the court, but it better not touch abortion shit. I'd like to win another election in the next 50 years, but dumbfuck Social Conservatives, who define themselves solely on such social matters because economics and voting trends are hard, love to ruin everything. If the Republicans want to give the Dems 50 seats in the midterms as the Dems hope, all they need to do is start talking about reversing Roe v Wade. It would be no different than if a conservative justice was leaving and Obama started talking about appointing a justice to over turn the courts opinion that "the Second Amendment is an individual right" making it a government right, and pushing to ban all guns. That is how big of an issue this is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:23:18 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Continuing in that vein: Doesn't that apply to virtually every law? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No, it is not settled law, not if a five-member majority of a future SCOTUS decides to overturn it. Regardless, there is no huge push right now on the conservative/Republican side to outlaw abortion, this is the liberals firing up the base. Doesn't that apply to virtually every law? But what basis would have to be extant for this to even come before them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:27:09 AM EDT
[#5]
Fingers crossed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:27:11 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope we stack the court, but it better not touch abortion shit. I'd like to win another election in the next 50 years, but dumbfuck Social Conservatives, who define themselves solely on such social matters because economics and voting trends are hard, love to ruin everything. I'm happy if he replaces several justices but they don't need to be meddling with Roe V Wade. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:29:27 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is why I voted for trump |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:30:28 AM EDT
[#8]
I hate to tell you all, but Roe isn't going anywhere, neither is gay marriage.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:31:35 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've always contended the same with regard to Roe V Wade. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
As much as I am against the murdering of unborn children. Roe v Wade is unlikely to be overturned even with 9 conservatives on the court. To many lies and untruths surround that case for it ever to be given another chance. But an additional conservative to replace Kennedy can be good for many other future cases. I certainly hope Kennedy really is retiring. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:31:59 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Beat me to it. I'm happy if he replaces several justices but they don't need to be meddling with Roe V Wade. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I hope we stack the court, but it better not touch abortion shit. I'd like to win another election in the next 50 years, but dumbfuck Social Conservatives, who define themselves solely on such social matters because economics and voting trends are hard, love to ruin everything. I'm happy if he replaces several justices but they don't need to be meddling with Roe V Wade. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:33:34 AM EDT
[#11]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:34:01 AM EDT
[#12]
While he may not have particpated in Roe since that happened before he was appointed, he definitely screwed us in Abramski in 2014.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:35:32 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, no kidding, all the social conservatives causing Hillary to win the last election.....Oh wait Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope we stack the court, but it better not touch abortion shit. I'd like to win another election in the next 50 years, but dumbfuck Social Conservatives, who define themselves solely on such social matters because economics and voting trends are hard, love to ruin everything. I'm happy if he replaces several justices but they don't need to be meddling with Roe V Wade. Homophobes, War on Drugs, and Anti abortionists cost a lot of votes that they don't need to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:36:43 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The interesting thing about Roe v. Wade in my mind was always the articulation as the "compelling" point of a state's interest in the unborn as at viability outside the mother's womb. As scientific advances continue to be made, and the point of viability moves closer and closer to conception, Roe may essentially become dead letter law anyways. Though, I presume because of cultural shifts in the ensuing years since the decision most states would refuse restrict/limit abortion anyways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:38:10 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Even the WAPO hahaha first comment is a classic: "Kennedy WILL retire, Ginsburg is half-dead and will die soon. How many forms of cancer has she had, and why didn't she mercifully move to New Zeland like she promised? Times they are a changing, and the WaPo is a humiliating embarrassment. journalism dies in fakeness." which one of you is this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:42:44 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's not like she didn't win the popular vote. Homophobes, War on Drugs, and Anti abortionists cost a lot of votes that they don't need to. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hope we stack the court, but it better not touch abortion shit. I'd like to win another election in the next 50 years, but dumbfuck Social Conservatives, who define themselves solely on such social matters because economics and voting trends are hard, love to ruin everything. I'm happy if he replaces several justices but they don't need to be meddling with Roe V Wade. Homophobes, War on Drugs, and Anti abortionists cost a lot of votes that they don't need to. I think it would be better if we passed laws where social conservatives cannot vote. They will have to take a social issue test and if they don't pass they can't vote. Maybe then conservatives can start winning back the House, Senate, Presidency, state governorship's, state legislatures. All those losses the conservatives have faced because of those pesky social conservatives. terrible I tell you. I was amazed at the losses at the state level because of those horrible social conservatives sticking to their principles, who needs that in society. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:43:48 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As much as I am against the murdering of unborn children. Roe v Wade is unlikely to be overturned even with 9 conservatives on the court. To many lies and untruths surround that case for it ever to be given another chance. But an additional conservative to replace Kennedy can be good for many other future cases. I certainly hope Kennedy really is retiring. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:47:50 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
hahaahahahha! first comment is a classic: "Kennedy WILL retire, Ginsburg is half-dead and will die soon. How many forms of cancer has she had, and why didn't she mercifully move to New Zeland like she promised? Times they are a changing, and the WaPo is a humiliating embarrassment. journalism dies in fakeness." which one of you is this? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Even the WAPO hahaha first comment is a classic: "Kennedy WILL retire, Ginsburg is half-dead and will die soon. How many forms of cancer has she had, and why didn't she mercifully move to New Zeland like she promised? Times they are a changing, and the WaPo is a humiliating embarrassment. journalism dies in fakeness." which one of you is this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:48:40 AM EDT
[#19]
MAGA!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:50:06 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm SO glad that the Democrats already forced the nuclear option into play.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:50:54 AM EDT
[#21]
Will this be the official thread?
Just a hunch, look for Trump to nominate a Black judge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:53:01 AM EDT
[#22]
Kek wills it. Shadilay.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:53:56 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That thing is already a corpse. Some kind of Satanism is keeping it moving. Maybe those spirit cooking the liberal democrats follow actually work? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:54:20 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can you imagine the great flood of liberal tears if Trump replaced him and Ginsberg with 2 young Constitutionalist judges?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:56:22 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Even the WAPO hahaha |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:58:58 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Washington Post = Jeff Bezos' Angry Anti-Trump Blog. It fucking sucks. Bring on the Meltdown 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 8:59:21 AM EDT
[#27]
I'm ok with this
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:00:08 AM EDT
[#28]
Fuck yes!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:01:02 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wouldn't there have to be a case with some sort of legal standing be submitted to the court for there to even be a chance for Roe to be overturned? What legal standing could one use to bring such a case? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:01:32 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Will this be the official thread? Just a hunch, look for Trump to nominate a Black judge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:02:15 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's not like she didn't win the popular vote. Homophobes, War on Drugs, and Anti abortionists cost a lot of votes that they don't need to. Aren't you? Oh, just OTHER people should. Got it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:03:55 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not tired of the WINNING yet, anyone else? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:04:45 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, I'm perfectly willing to sacrifice my principles, to the one, and everything I believe in to win elections. Aren't you? Oh, just OTHER people should. Got it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:06:11 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hope he picks hardiman. 
Googled him yep he'll work
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:10:40 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
this x 1000 If the Republicans want to give the Dems 50 seats in the midterms as the Dems hope, all they need to do is start talking about reversing Roe v Wade. It would be no different than if a conservative justice was leaving and Obama started talking about appointing a justice to over turn the courts opinion that "the Second Amendment is an individual right" making it a government right, and pushing to ban all guns. That is how big of an issue this is. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I hope we stack the court, but it better not touch abortion shit. I'd like to win another election in the next 50 years, but dumbfuck Social Conservatives, who define themselves solely on such social matters because economics and voting trends are hard, love to ruin everything. If the Republicans want to give the Dems 50 seats in the midterms as the Dems hope, all they need to do is start talking about reversing Roe v Wade. It would be no different than if a conservative justice was leaving and Obama started talking about appointing a justice to over turn the courts opinion that "the Second Amendment is an individual right" making it a government right, and pushing to ban all guns. That is how big of an issue this is. It's just another Liberal scare tactic that worked during the election to convince a large number of fucking morons that "Trump wants to ban abortion and birth control" just like "Trump hates black people", "Trump will ban gay marriage", and "Trump wants to kick all foreigners out of the country." Those nitwits dream up the worst possible shit and claim they're actual attributes of the person they hate... then they keep repeating it with all their dumbass Liberal friends until every dumbass Liberal believes the same dumbass shit that was never true to begin with. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:13:13 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is a Latin term which I can't remember but it basically means let the decision stand and it's a principle that the SCOTUS works under. Essentially it is intended to make sure that future SCOTUS sessions don't reverse standing decisions. The only way that Row v Wade could be imapacted--see that I didn't say reversed--would be for new cases to come along that chip away at the edges. But as I understand it, abortion will always be legal due to Roe v Wade. There will never be a time when abortions will be illegal in America again. That's how I remember constitutional law from college because we discussed this very case. The problem is it only works if the actual real live humans sitting on the court abide by it. We know from experience that the liberal judges will ignore precedent when it suits them. All we would need is conservative judges who were willing to do the same thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:16:32 AM EDT
[#37]
This would be wonderful news, indeed!
I doubt Roe will be overturned, but it should be - the Court failed to honor the principle of Federalism when deciding the case, resulting in a gradual degradation of the authority of the several States. What is worse, the claim of power on behalf of the national government at the expense of the States is unequally applied; you may travel to New York City to kill your unborn child, but you cannot carry your pistol there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:18:28 AM EDT
[#38]
Until Kennedy announces he is retiring all the speculation is just pure BS. For how many years have the pundits been claiming Ginsburg was retiring? She is all but a wasted corpse but still there.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:19:04 AM EDT
[#39]
You guys need to remember that ABORTIONS AND GAY MARRIAGE WERE NOT ILLEGAL BEFORE THE SCOTUS DECISIONS. IT WAS UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL STATE - PER THE CONSTITUTION.
The SCOTUS decisions are violations of the 10th Amendment. Overturning Roe v Wade and Gay marriage will not make abortion and gay same sex marriage illegal, it will simply give that decision back to the states, PER THE CONSTITUTION. Sure, I understand the political implications, and maybe it's smarter to not touch these two cases, but if you follow the Constitution, these two cases should be overturned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:20:20 AM EDT
[#40]
I'll believe it when I see it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:21:06 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Continuing in that vein: Doesn't that apply to virtually every law? But what basis would have to be extant for this to even come before them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:21:30 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hate to tell you all, but Roe isn't going anywhere, neither is gay marriage. Hoping for Ginsburg to fall over next. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:21:49 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Liberal politicians and activists lie to their base to stir them up with hate, anger and fear. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Roe v Wade was settled in the early 70's. Kennedy was confirmed in the late 1980's..why the talk about Roe vs Wade with him? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:22:21 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's not how fear mongering works. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wouldn't there have to be a case with some sort of legal standing be submitted to the court for there to even be a chance for Roe to be overturned? What legal standing could one use to bring such a case? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:22:49 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Latin phrase is "stare decisis." It is a principle of giving deference to prior opinions, but there are numerous examples of the Court overturning prior decisions. Once a decision is rendered it is not thereafter forever engraved in stone. See, for example, Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education. Kennedy leaving isn't a huge win in my mind. The vast majority of the time he casts his vote against government restrictions. Some call him left-leaning because when he applies this to things like gay marriage he says government shouldn't be able to restrict two consenting adults from calling themselves married and, therefore, if the state is going to recognize marriages it has to recognize them all. But he also was on the pro-gun side in Heller and McDonald, he votes for limiting search and seizure, is dubious of government overreach in things like environmental protection regulations, riled the "liberals" by voting against government restrictions on speech in Citizens United, etc. Edit: I can't think this morning. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:23:14 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be great if he gets to do skeletor too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:25:28 AM EDT
[#47]
When we have these posts and I twist my mental Rollodex to come up with a suitable person Condolelezza Rice pops into mind. I suppose without a law degree that would be unlikely . I like and respect her and wish we could get her back into public service. Whenever my liberal friends start giving me a hard time about my conservative values and try to claim I don't like hilldog or Polozi because I am afraid to vote/support for a woman I toss out Rice and tell them I would support her for any Govt job or public office |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:28:10 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When we have these posts and I twist my mental Rollodex to come up with a suitable person Condolelezza Rice pops into mind. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:28:39 AM EDT
[#49]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/24/2017 9:30:27 AM EDT
[#50]
come on Bader-Ginsburg, you can quit too, better to take retirement than to die in the saddle .............Quit Ruth, you can do it quit.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
