Posted on 05/12/2005 9:50:55 PM PDT by neverdem
Well that's from Schumer and his ilk. What did you expect?
I'm not exactly sure but I believe it can be done through Congress. Another option would be for Congress simply to eliminate those judges positions, pending the creation of new positions. Failing every other remedy we have the call to arms and rebellion against an unyielding tyranny. That is of course a last resort, but one which has been used before. First the people must demonstrate a clear political will. It may come in conjunction with this issue of gay marriage or possibly the illegals issue. Else we can just kiss our Republic goodbye and get used to sucking hind tit to every special interest that the fertile mind of these folks can come up with.
I M P E A C H
The obvious thing is to change the US Constitution.
...Another case of "the will of the people don't mean squat"...
Perhaps the money of the people will mean something, when we put our foot down.
Imagine Justice so and so, without a job.
More Judicial activism. If the three branches of government are equal, why do the judges always get the last word? And why does their last word become law?
Ping!
Hmmm... the Slimes didn't say who appointed this guy. They do that for judges appointed by Republicans...
http://clinton6.nara.gov/1996/03/1996-03-06-bataillon-named-to-us-district-court.html
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
I'm almost glad. Let's have this fight. It's go time.
Good, another ballot measure will have to be written and voted on in 06. These ballot measures do draw out the base and that ain't good for demoRATS.
This is not meant to sound in any way impudent, but exactly who the hell is running the bloody show over there?
I know. I figured it was either the bent one or the Nobel Prize winner. When it's in breaking news or front page news, you should scan the thread for links. You might save yourself some work. Thanks for the link anyway. ;^)
The black robes think they have the final word since the Madison versus Marbury decision in the early 1800s.
Any chance the people might get a say any time soon?
I'm not optimistic that the U.S. Constitution will be amended any time soon. It would need a two thirds vote in both the House and Senate and ratification by three quarters of state governments, i.e. 38 states. That's a tall order. The people have no direct say. It's just through their legislators. This court decision might be vacated on appeal. God knows how this will play out.
Judicial activism gone wild.
Those who are complaining about judicial activism should start eliminating judicial activism in their own states. It is much easier to do that in your state rather than taking on the entire federal government.
That's not quite true. The 18th Amendment, Prohibition was repealed by the 21st Amendment in 1933 in what was then record time for a proposed Amendment. The 21st Amendment was ratified by the neccessary three-fourths of the States by the OTHER method for State ratification that is in the Constitution, State Conventions. Once it could get out of the Congress (very long shot), it was done by State Conventions there is a good chance that it would pass since it would (in most States) only take a majority popular vote to ratify the proposed Amendment.
In fact, I think that so-called 'social' Amendments to the Constitution should be by State Convention, with the Legislature used for other types of Amendments...
dvwjr
Amazing, the opinion of one wacko Judge overturns the will of the people. I know that even the liberals can see that this is wrong
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.