Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem
Because the Court does not explain orders denying review, there is no way to know why the Justices would again choose not to get involved in a controversy that, in essence, the Heller decision itself has deepened.

Where in the Constitution does it say the Supreme Court needn't trouble itself to explain things to the commoners?

8 posted on 04/15/2013 6:50:14 PM PDT by Standing Wolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Standing Wolf

“Where in the Constitution does it say the Supreme Court needn’t trouble itself to explain things to the commoners?”

Where in the constitution does it say that the Federal Supreme court has the final word on The law that defines their own limits?

The Federal court has all sorts of unworkable and frankly dictatorial powers that they have given to themselves.


10 posted on 04/15/2013 6:54:54 PM PDT by Monorprise (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: Standing Wolf
-- Where in the Constitution does it say the Supreme Court needn't trouble itself to explain things to the commoners? --

Review of most cases by SCOTUS is discretionary, and is not provided as a matter of right. Anyway, see Article III for the short version.

You can't expect a modern branch of the federal government to take power away from the federal government. Maybe 80 years ago, but not now. The government is completely out of control. Not to worry, it'll collapse of its own weight.

16 posted on 04/16/2013 5:29:27 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson