Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgiving

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rover
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    http://www.esquire.com/news-politics...supreme-court/

    Leave a comment:


  • St. Clown
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by joecct View Post
    Age of consent to marry varies from State to State. When Harry, who is 21, legally marries 15 year old Sally in the State of Hawaii and then moves to Jersey City, he's still legally married, despite what the State of New Jersey may think about it.

    If he met Sally in Atlantic City, he'd have to wait until she's 16 if he can get parental consent or 18 if not.
    Yet we saw states that were specifically passing laws that would violate that same Full Faith and Credit clause found in the US Constitution that they'd always been happy to honor prior to the push for homosexual marriage. It's either bigoted or allowing religion to dictate law to the irreligious. Regardless of the answer, it's not acceptable.

    Leave a comment:


  • joecct
    replied
    Originally posted by BassAle View Post
    Would that have been an acceptable solution for interracial marriage? Alabama doesn't have to allow it, but if an already married couple moves to Alabama they get to stay married? Meanwhile their neighbors, who also happen to be an interracial couple, can't get married without first traveling to some other state that recognizes it?

    Just stop joe. You're an idiot.
    Age of consent to marry varies from State to State. When Harry, who is 21, legally marries 15 year old Sally in the State of Hawaii and then moves to Jersey City, he's still legally married, despite what the State of New Jersey may think about it.

    If he met Sally in Atlantic City, he'd have to wait until she's 16 if he can get parental consent or 18 if not.

    Leave a comment:


  • BassAle
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by joecct View Post
    No. The solution was to say that a state can make its own laws regarding marriage but must respect and honor the marriage laws of other states. That would have given both sides what they wanted and enabled the legislative solution.

    Remember the "Nevada quickie" divorces? They were good in every state even if that state had more restrictive divorce laws.
    Would that have been an acceptable solution for interracial marriage? Alabama doesn't have to allow it, but if an already married couple moves to Alabama they get to stay married? Meanwhile their neighbors, who also happen to be an interracial couple, can't get married without first traveling to some other state that recognizes it?

    Just stop joe. You're an idiot.

    Leave a comment:


  • joecct
    replied
    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    If nothing else, the Full Faith and Credit Clause makes a state solution impossible. You're married in NY but when you move to TX you're not? What?
    No. The solution was to say that a state can make its own laws regarding marriage but must respect and honor the marriage laws of other states. That would have given both sides what they wanted and enabled the legislative solution.

    Remember the "Nevada quickie" divorces? They were good in every state even if that state had more restrictive divorce laws.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by Rover View Post
    Umm...you DO realize Clinton gave the court RBG and Breyer, right?
    I realize that the Clintons follow the path of political expediency, from DADT to welfare "reform" to mass incarceration. The Clintons do what's good for them.

    It's entirely possible that the Clintons will accidentally also do what's best for the country, if it serves their purposes. And this is of course something that is part of every politician's makeup. With the Clintons it is simply something extreme like, again, a Nixon. It's just that the environmental conditions have to be right. If the Clintons align with your agenda they're great to have, because they are tough and mean and play the game like death is on the line.

    They're a great weapon to have, as long as you have the kill switch.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by Rover View Post
    I have no idea about your leanings in sporting matters Scooby.
    He's a bastion of positivity on all things Minnesota sports.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    Oh, I think if you combine it with the Dem Landslide scenario then she'll be all over nominating liberals. All of my predictions and evaluations of the Clintons are predicated on the assumption that they are sociopaths with no beliefs and no moral compass. They're like political capitalists -- they'll put any input into the machine if it moves more units. They are motivated purely by power -- their Maslow hierarchy is a ziggurat that flattens at "esteem." If Hillary was somehow elected during a conservative wave election, she'd become a conservative. They are Zelig.
    I like your posts. They make me learn good words.

    ( Seriously though, I have to breakout a dictionary every time. That's a good thing. Especially since you aren't tossing them out like this guy

    Leave a comment:


  • Rover
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
    Yes, yes, I'm the outlier. I'm the insanity. Sports, Politics, whatever, I am clearly the lunatic fringe.
    I have no idea about your leanings in sporting matters Scooby.

    I think Bernie Sanders has given voice to a lot of left wing conspiracy theorists. Of which you and Kep are charter members. That's cool but at some point it gets a bit old.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Statement from the GOP head of the Judiciary Committee on the nominee.

    http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/...-supreme-court

    Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement after President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland, the Chief Judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court of the United States.

    “When they structured our nation, the founders placed trust in three separate but equal branches of government. Co-equal authorities are throughout the Constitution, including Article II, Section 2, where the power to nominate an individual to the Supreme Court is granted to the President and authority is given to the Senate to provide advice and consent. Nowhere in the Constitution does it describe how the Senate should either provide its consent or withhold its consent.

    “Today the President has exercised his constitutional authority. A majority of the Senate has decided to fulfill its constitutional role of advice and consent by withholding support for the nomination during a presidential election year, with millions of votes having been cast in highly charged contests. As Vice President Biden previously said, it’s a political cauldron to avoid. Judge Bork learned even after being unanimously confirmed for a circuit court judgeship, the confirmation process for the Supreme Court is unlike any other.

    “It’s also important to remember the type of nominee President Obama said he’s seeking. He says his nominee will arrive at ‘just decisions and fair outcomes’ based on the application of ‘life experience’ to the ‘rapidly changing times.’ The so-called empathy standard is not an appropriate basis for selecting a Supreme Court nominee.

    “A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice. Do we want a court that interprets the law, or do we want a court that acts as an unelected super legislature? This year is a tremendous opportunity for our country to have a sincere and honest debate about the role of the Supreme Court in our constitutional system of government.”
    In other words. All you people who voted for Obama and got him elected twice. You don't count. But, yeah, Obama's playing GO.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by Rover View Post
    Umm...you DO realize Clinton gave the court RBG and Breyer, right?

    The notion that a Dem would appoint someone that would uphold Citizens United is as fuking ridiculous as Bernie Sanders tax plans. Its like worrying that Hillary will appoint someone who'd overturn Roe v Wade. At some point you have to spend time in reality with the rest of us not named Scooby, Kep.
    Yes, yes, I'm the outlier. I'm the insanity. Sports, Politics, whatever, I am clearly the lunatic fringe.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rover
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    Oh, I think if you combine it with the Dem Landslide scenario then she'll be all over nominating liberals. All of my predictions and evaluations of the Clintons are predicated on the assumption that they are sociopaths with no beliefs and no moral compass. They're like political capitalists -- they'll put any input into the machine if it moves more units. They are motivated purely by power -- their Maslow hierarchy is a ziggurat that flattens at "esteem." If Hillary was somehow elected during a conservative wave election, she'd become a conservative. They are Zelig.

    Umm...you DO realize Clinton gave the court RBG and Breyer, right?

    The notion that a Dem would appoint someone that would uphold Citizens United is as fuking ridiculous as Bernie Sanders tax plans. Its like worrying that Hillary will appoint someone who'd overturn Roe v Wade. At some point you have to spend time in reality with the rest of us not named Scooby, Kep.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
    My right as an American to hate it. And, my sentiments on Obama are not much different then most others. It's well documented.
    I am not denying you your rights...in fact I love when you voice an opinion it takes balls to be wrong so often publicly and still come back for more!

    Hell I am not even that big of an Obama defender, but jesus I will defer to him on this matter long before I will trust the opinions of some Internet Geniuses. He has 100000 times the information and experience in these matters than all of us combined. With his knowledge of the law, his knowledge of all the candidates and his experience dealing with The No Brigade I will trust he knows what he is doing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
    There's a chance the Senate, if it is a majorly Dem, would seriously push back on that kind of choice. If only temporarily.
    Oh, I think if you combine it with the Dem Landslide scenario then she'll be all over nominating liberals. All of my predictions and evaluations of the Clintons are predicated on the assumption that they are sociopaths with no beliefs and no moral compass. They're like political capitalists -- they'll put any input into the machine if it moves more units. They are motivated purely by power -- their Maslow hierarchy is a ziggurat that flattens at "esteem." If Hillary was somehow elected during a conservative wave election, she'd become a conservative. They are Zelig.

    Leave a comment:


  • ScoobyDoo
    replied
    Re: The Power of the SCOTUS VIII - I am certiorari we'll be arguing until Thanksgivin

    Originally posted by dxmnkd316 View Post
    We're playing tic-tac-toe and he's playing Go.
    That'd be nice to believe but his record with the Republicans puts him on the tic-tac-toe side of the ledger. And that will ultimately be his legacy.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X