That is the biggest piece of hooey I’ve heard in a long time. Judges and courts overturn elections all the time. The 20th Amendment REQUIRES the outcome of an election to be overturned if the person chosen by the voters and/or Congress have failed to meet the requirements of the Constitution. Do you honestly believe that Bob Bauer and Nancy Pelosi are more likely to believe that the democrat-controlled Congress would hold them accountable for nominating an eligible President than a court of law which has to follow the Federal Rules of Evidence (and can actually compel the production of essential evidence and legally determine things like birth facts, which Congress can’t)? These are Pelosi’s colleagues, for heaven’s sake. These are the people that SHE CHOOSES WHICH COMMITTEE THEY WILL SERVE ON.
No, the Founding Fathers had 3 separate branches of government with separate powers and providing checks and balances because they knew that any one branch would NOT hold itself accountable. They are peers. They count on scratching each others’ backs in order to make their sausage. There is no way in heck that Congress is going to hold its own political leadership accountable to the law. The only branch that holds either the legislature or the executive accountable to the law is the judiciary. Throw that out and you’ve got imbalance, loss of accountability, and certain corruption.
Furthermore, why do you think that Congress is even CAPABLE of interpreting and applying the US Constitution? The people elect some dirt farmer to go to Washington DC and all of a sudden that makes that dirt farmer an expert on interpreting the Constitution? How about we elect people to be our brain surgeons too, why we’re at it, to make sure that no brain surgeon becomes “too powerful”?
And you wanna know the worst irony in what you’re saying? ONE JUDGE IN WASHINGTON IN PRACTICE THREW OUT THE STATUTE that required that he make sure that election fraud and/or errors were corrected. YOu wanna talk about tyranny? THAT is tyranny. Lawless judges are tyranny, and that’s exactly what you are supporting. This judge made stuff up out of whole cloth and totally ignored the text of the law. When the decision was appealed his buddies at the state Supreme Court scratched his back and hit Linda Jordan with a $13,000 fine for asking that 6 particular relevant legal issues be addressed (but really to punish her for indirectly pointing out that they were all committing misprision of fraud and forgery).
And another thing. You folks keep saying that the judiciary shouldn’t be able to overturn an election. But what if John McCain had challenged his eligibility? Should the courts refuse to hear the case because they CAN’T overturn an election? Roe v Wade overturned election results in almost every state in the union. Should the courts have said to Roe (or to ANYBODY who challenged state laws), “You can’t appeal these laws because that was the political process and we aren’t authorized to undo the results of elections and the political process”? What you’re saying is making absolutely no sense. This is precisely what the Constitution and the judiciary that interprets and applies the Constitution is FOR. This is what makes us a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC and not a democracy.
A democracy is where the people can vote to behead infidels and that’s it. The political process can say that only Muslim speech is allowed and that’s it. There are no guarantees. A basic, simple vote decides EVERYTHING, and there is nothing that is more sacred than what 1 deciding voter feels like voting for on a particular day.
Obama is trying to rule as if this was a democracy. The 51% decide to take all the money from the 49%; so let it be written, so let it be done. The supposed President says nobody can have guns. Shazamm! That’s all there is to it. THAT is tyranny. Democracy, where the 51% can say whatever they want with no guarantees for anybody, is tyranny.
The courts exist to make sure that doesn’t happen. They are what separates us from a banana republic. If the courts have no power to hold the political process accountable to the Constitution, then we are Egypt, or Iran, or Zimbabwe.
What are you doing here, if that is what you’re after? That’s not pro-America. LL, why are you even a lawyer if you believe that there are no guaranteed rights and no branch of government that can hold the system accountable to a higher principle than sausage-making expedience and smoky backroom deals?
This isn’t piddles. This is everything America is about. If we don’t get this right we are dead as a nation.
I just happened to update this thread. Looks like a member of the opp. team “engaging”.
Flak, target and all that.
You realize that Congress wrote all of the amendments to the Constitution, including the 20th?
The people elect some dirt farmer to go to Washington DC and all of a sudden that makes that dirt farmer an expert on interpreting the Constitution? How about we elect people to be our brain surgeons too, why we’re at it, to make sure that no brain surgeon becomes “too powerful”?
...and yet you, who claim no legal training, have decided that every court in America, from SCOTUS on down, is wrong, and in fact so wrong as to obviously be corrupt? Did it ever occur to you that the reason every judge in America and 99.99% of all lawyers-- including prominent conservative constitutional lawyers who are challenging Obama on health care and term limits-- disagree with you is perhaps because you're wrong? Did that thought ever cross your mind for a second?
Your comment about "dirt farmers" not really understanding Constitutional interpretation reminds me of an old Jewish expression which can be translated as "if only your ears could hear what your mouth is saying."