This man and all leftists like him are reprehensible. When I see a correctly decided Supreme Court case that goes against what I personally wish had happened, I side with the Court. When the Constitution gets in the way of what I want done, I defer to the Constitution. Some good things are outside the scope of government authority, and in those cases government should not get involved, no matter how tempting they are. That includes but is in no way limited to some anti-terrorism actions of the past two decades.
Dictat by judge. We have seen it often.
The constitution demands principled men.
The “progressive movement” demands rule by man, not by law.
They are irreconcilably in opposition.
The LAW is designed to protect innocent powerless citizens. Powerful people can protect themselves. Anways have - always will...
Powerless innocent people also support the police while corrupt powerful look down on them... Police and the LAW stand in the way of powerful people taking what they want because they have the power to take what they want.
It's why most of us can't relate to Hollywood movies. They take the view of the corrupt elite and attempt to gussie it up as an innocent powerless person's view.
Tricky and complicated issues here.
The LAW is designed to protect innocent powerless citizens. Powerful people can protect themselves. Anways have - always will...
Powerless innocent people also support the police while corrupt powerful look down on them... Police and the LAW stand in the way of powerful people taking what they want because they have the power to take what they want. It's why elites in hellholes support the criminal underclass... like white liberal elites do in our country with black inner city criminals. They stand WITH the thugs and against the law biding black citizens living in those crime infested areas...
It's why most of us can't relate to Hollywood movies. Hollywood takes 'the view' of the corrupt elite and attempts to gussie it up as an innocent powerless person's view.
Tricky and complicated issues here.
There are hundreds if not thousands of these black-robed despots in our judiciary. Congress will not solve this problem - Article V.
Term Limits:
One Term in office,
Two Terms in Jail!!!
The executive should be immune from being sued. If not we have the rule of the judges.
This needs to be enshrined in Congress.
Power corrupts.
The role of the judiciary is tomproperly translate/interprete the law.
All these judges are illiterates. None of them know a foreign language or latin type legal translations, I can guarrantee you that.
They could not translate the Consitution in what it means with respect to current limits on legislations.
Judges should be there only to limit legislation, not to enhance it or strike it down because they do not think it is big enough and includes enough...
President another judges approved now. Can anyone predict how effective the Federal judiciary would be if judges had to be replaced on a regular basis due to expiring terms?
In Law School, Posner is highly respected.
Just goes to show you the garbage that Law School, in general, is turning out.
Why is it that liberal judges never “grow” and become conservative?
Posner is an idiot piece of crap.
Check this out...this is an actual quote from this guy:
"...I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments), he wrote. Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21st century..."
Of all the things I have read recently, that quote angers and disgusts me because knowledge of WHY the Constitution was written in the fashion it was is CRITICAL to understanding the context of how a judge should live up to the oath they must take:
OATH TAKEN BY FEDERAL JUDGES: "I, Richard Posner, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as Seventh Circuit Court Judge under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."
How the HELL can he live up to that oath, if he decides he is going to simply disregard the thought process behind its creation????? (As if an oath actually means anything to liberals.)
Without understanding the underlying issue, it is easy to be an advocate for disregarding anything covered by the Constitution.
And it is why that judge's comment angered me as it did. He should have known more than ANYONE why it is important to know why things were put in place.
Otherwise, you have to be a liberal and rediscover the damned wheel every few years. Or months. Or days.
Once you throw out the Creator, you throw out unalienable rights.
The law then becomes a communist’s diabolical playground.
He must have noticed the youth and potential longevity for newly named Conservative judges who will change the political landscape for a VERY LONG time.
Thank you, Judge Posner.
I would seek to somehow limit the power of judicial review.