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

No way she can wiggle out of that one. /sar
1 posted on 06/29/2010 2:09:07 PM PDT by Clump
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
To: Clump

She lies.


2 posted on 06/29/2010 2:10:20 PM PDT by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

She lies just like Sodomayor!! The Constitution means NOTHING to them.


3 posted on 06/29/2010 2:11:24 PM PDT by Dapper 26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump
Kagan responded that "once a court decides a case as it did, it's binding precedent." And she said judges must respect a precedent unless it proves unworkable or new facts emerge that would change the circumstances of a case.

It is not the court's role to decide if a law, much less a constitutional provision, is unworkable. That is a political decision. A judge must restrict himself to asking what does the law actually say.

4 posted on 06/29/2010 2:13:29 PM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

I have no doubt she would have sided with the minority on the recent gun decision. But it’s striking how little attention this ruling is getting from the the leftysphere. There’s even a loud left majority in favor of the 2nd amendment. Add to that the obvious political dynamite involved in opposing the 2A, I do think the left has given up restricting guns as a policy goal.


5 posted on 06/29/2010 2:13:37 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan says she considers recent high court decisions expanding gun rights to be “settled law.”
::::

If you are fool enough to believe this statement, you would believe Clinton and Gore. This fraud will say anything to get confirmed and become the liberal activist spoiler of our judicial system.


9 posted on 06/29/2010 2:19:34 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

She’s a liar.


11 posted on 06/29/2010 2:20:31 PM PDT by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump
Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan says she considers recent high court decisions expanding gun rights to be "settled law."

Firstly, the premise is bogus. The recent high court decisions did not expand any gun rights, they merely moved towards reinstating them from facist power grabs.

Secondly, Kagan's statement is so stupid on so many levels. Whether you agree or disagree with the recent rulings the ink is barely dry on the ruling yesterday so how is it actually "settled law", implying some sort of long standing ruling?

The woman needs to be hammered and hammered again to show how wrong she is for the appointment.

12 posted on 06/29/2010 2:21:22 PM PDT by frogjerk (I believe in unicorns, fairies and pro-life Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

I think her nose grew a little


13 posted on 06/29/2010 2:23:13 PM PDT by daku
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump
This has nothing to do with guns. It is about Roe -v- Wade. If she admitted past decisions could be overturned then RvW would be vulnerable. They will trade ground on guns to hold the line on abortion. As Daley and some of his advisers said today they can use excessive regulation, ammunition restrictions and “Gun Taxes” to make owning a firearm legally nearly impossible without resorting to an outright ban.
15 posted on 06/29/2010 2:24:48 PM PDT by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

Liberals will ALWAYS say what they have to say in order to get the position. Once they are in, they will do whatever they damn well please.

I have contacted Sessions and Hatch as well as my two senators and voiced my concerns about this nominee. I have strongly encouraged them all to filibuster, which means they each will have to grow a backbone.


16 posted on 06/29/2010 2:24:53 PM PDT by Texas56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

Sotomayor claimed at her confirmation hearings that she supported the 2nd Amendment.

This month she sided with the losers, supporting Chicago’s failed gun ban. That makes Justice Sotomayor a liar.

Well, don’t trust Kagan either; she’s a liar too.

During the Clinton Administration she was against the 2nd Amendment, advising for very tight gun control. Now she states it is “settled law”.

I say BS.

It is time Republicans look at what a SCOTUS candidate has done in the past - not what that person claims to believe.

Kagan is a liar.


19 posted on 06/29/2010 3:02:02 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO Foreign Nationals as our President!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California decried growing gang violence in her state, saying officials need leeway to deal with it.

Throwing Feinstein out of office would be a good start.

20 posted on 06/29/2010 3:04:58 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump
Photobucket
21 posted on 06/29/2010 3:05:52 PM PDT by mojitojoe (When crisis becomes opportunity, crisis becomes the goal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump
Let me see if I have this right.

Settled law is settled law until it is changed for the better.

Quite profound. (extreme sarc)

25 posted on 06/29/2010 3:15:19 PM PDT by Know et al (Spill chock want ketch awl yore miss takes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump
i wasn't born yesterday...

26 posted on 06/29/2010 3:20:12 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

Hell, given their most recent ruling, even four members of the court themselves don’t even look at court precedent as being “settled law”. Those four justices continued to act as if the 2nd didn’t apply to an individual in their decent against incorporation of the 2nd. They acted as if the Heller ruling never happened....


27 posted on 06/29/2010 3:35:27 PM PDT by KoRn (Department of Homeland Security, Certified - "Right Wing Extremist")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: AdmSmith; Berosus; bigheadfred; blueyon; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; ...
Kagan responded that "once a court decides a case as it did, it's binding precedent." And she said judges must respect a precedent unless it proves unworkable or new facts emerge that would change the circumstances of a case.
Get off her back, it depends on what your definition of is is. ;') Thanks Clump
28 posted on 06/29/2010 3:41:30 PM PDT by SunkenCiv ("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

Liars lie.


30 posted on 06/29/2010 3:44:45 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

NRA where are you?


37 posted on 06/29/2010 6:43:35 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Clump

Doesn’t mean diddly - Plessy v. Ferguson was “settled law” - right up until the point that Brown v. Board of Education was decided.


38 posted on 06/29/2010 6:44:48 PM PDT by Oceander (The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance -- Thos. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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