Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Jim Noble

[[certain conduct IS a case “arising under this Constitution”.]]

I corrected myself in previous post- you are right- certain conduct does arise under the constitution- However, the court can only render an opinion- their opinion is not law (that I’m aware?) As far as I know, and I’m no legal scholar, congress has to render law based on either accepting their opinion, or rejecting it, and it is states who then pass state laws on marriage based on what congress has made law (ie: they can’t ban minorities from marriage because beign a minority is a genetic trait, not a lifestyle choice, and would be considered racism if it was banned)

This is hwy gay people have been so desperate to get their CHOICE labeled as a ‘genetic trait’ that ‘they can’t help’- But now it looks like they don’t even have to do that because the supreme court has single handedly undone millennia of state’s and government’s decisions based on partisan subjective opinion that DEFIES the established moral law


36 posted on 09/05/2015 4:19:45 PM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies ]


To: Bob434

“However, the court can only render an opinion- their opinion is not law (that I’m aware?)”

Common law:

“The common-law system prevails in England, the United States, and other countries colonized by England. It is distinct from the civil-law system, which predominates in Europe and in areas colonized by France and Spain. The common-law system is used in all the states of the United States except Louisiana, where French Civil Law combined with English Criminal Law to form a hybrid system. The common-law system is also used in Canada, except in the Province of Quebec, where the French civil-law system prevails.

Anglo-American common law traces its roots to the medieval idea that the law as handed down from the king’s courts represented the common custom of the people. It evolved chiefly from three English Crown courts of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries: the Exchequer, the King’s Bench, and the Common Pleas. These courts eventually assumed jurisdiction over disputes previously decided by local or manorial courts, such as baronial, admiral’s (maritime), guild, and forest courts, whose jurisdiction was limited to specific geographic or subject matter areas. Equity courts, which were instituted to provide relief to litigants in cases where common-law relief was unavailable, also merged with common-law courts. This consolidation of jurisdiction over most legal disputes into several courts was the framework for the modern Anglo-American judicial system...

Common-law courts base their decisions on prior judicial pronouncements rather than on legislative enactments. Where a statute governs the dispute, judicial interpretation of that statute determines how the law applies. Common-law judges rely on their predecessors’ decisions of actual controversies, rather than on abstract codes or texts, to guide them in applying the law. Common-law judges find the grounds for their decisions in law reports, which contain decisions of past controversies. Under the doctrine of Stare Decisis, common-law judges are obliged to adhere to previously decided cases, or precedents, where the facts are substantially the same. A court’s decision is binding authority for similar cases decided by the same court or by lower courts within the same jurisdiction. The decision is not binding on courts of higher rank within that jurisdiction or in other jurisdictions, but it may be considered as persuasive authority.”

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Common+law

Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law


38 posted on 09/05/2015 4:27:34 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (Can you remember what America was like in 2004?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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