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

If justices followed the Constitution there would be no swing votes.
1 posted on 10/05/2018 7:01:04 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-146 next last
To: yesthatjallen
If justices followed the Constitution there would be no swing votes.

She doesn't get that. Which means she's an ideologue, knows it but doesn't know why that's a problem.

134 posted on 10/05/2018 7:55:43 PM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Interesting that only Republican appointees serve as swing votes.


135 posted on 10/05/2018 7:57:39 PM PDT by Behind the Blue Wall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

““It’s not so clear, that I think going forward, that sort of middle position — it’s not so clear whether we’ll have it,” Kagan said.”

They have Roberts as the swing vote.


136 posted on 10/05/2018 7:58:10 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Proud member of the DWN party. (Deplorable Wing Nut))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

She is speaking for the communist progressives. When the court was weighted “left” the swing vote kept it moving left as a drift anchor always pulling left amongst the three branches. With a solid constitutional bias, the leftists will call the court as Out of Center, or out of balance and THEREFORE able to be ignored and de-legitamatized by the other branches in the leftist world.

I believe a similar point was made by an article earlier today in a post. I will try and link that thread if I come across.

My point is that Keagan is setting out the party line from now on. The progressive marching orders, if you will.

Their idea of the procedure to be used to fight a constitutional court will be to claim it is not centered and no longer honor its decisions. This whole thing revolves around something that many conservative constitutional scholars have revolted against: Judicial Supremacy.

Judicial Suprremacy (Conservapedia)

US Supreme Court Building
Judicial Supremacy is the liberal, elitist view that courts are “supreme” over the other two branches of government and the Constitution, and that courts have the authority to tell the president and Congress what they may or may not do. As explained by Phyllis Schlafly in her classic book on the topic, The Supremacists (2nd Ed. 2006):[1]

“ Textbooks still say that we have three balanced branches of government – but textbooks are badly behind the times because one branch has assumed authority over the other two. Today, we are suffering from the oppressive rule of judicial supremacists who have replaced the rule of law with the rule of judges.

Well, once the Court no longer has that one swing vote that made the Rehnquist Court tolerable after the liberal supremacy of the Warren Court, the Leftists will use our objection to the Court’s power against us and if they get control of Congress or the Executive again they will IGNORE the court.

That analysis does not look enough at history however. The original left, on the plains in France, relied upon a Kryptonite call the Will of the People. My prediction is, the left goes back to its roots and goes beyond the supremacy doctrine. When the Left wants to ignore the Court, they will start all new methods of tapping into their special feeling of understanding of The Will of the People. It will resemble the analysis of Thomas Sowell in The Vision of the Anointed. They will claim special access and knowledge of the Will of the People because they are the Ones that Care.

Get ready for the next two decades.


139 posted on 10/05/2018 8:02:39 PM PDT by KC Burke (If all the world is a stage, I would like to request my lighting be adjusted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

“If justices followed the Constitution there would be no swing votes.”

You took my comment. I’ll amend it to ‘any justice who swings away from the Constitution should be impeached.’


141 posted on 10/05/2018 8:02:51 PM PDT by Forgiven_Sinner (Seek you first the kingdom of God, and all things will be given to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen
If justices followed the Constitution there would be no swing votes.

That is correct!

144 posted on 10/05/2018 8:08:08 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (Trump hates negative publicity, unless he generates it. -Corey Lewandowski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen
If justices followed the Constitution there would be no swing votes.

The USSC should always follow the Constitution and there would never be any so called swing votes.

Now we have 5 strong conservative judges who will follow the US Constitution as written.

Our founding fathers were men of God who wrote the Constitution.

145 posted on 10/05/2018 8:10:33 PM PDT by TheConservativeTejano (God Bless Texas...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Hey Kayan, why don’t you become the swing vote!


146 posted on 10/05/2018 8:10:44 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Maybe she should retire then, seeing
as how she thinks her decisions won’t
have any sway in the court.
It’s going to be fun to watch when
President Trump has the opportunity
to appoint another Justice. RGB ain’t
gonna last much longer.


148 posted on 10/05/2018 8:11:30 PM PDT by Lean-Right (Eat More Moose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Roberts is taking over the Kennedy swing seat, bet on it.


149 posted on 10/05/2018 8:15:34 PM PDT by Lurkinanloomin (Natural Born Citizen Means Born Here of Citizen Parents__Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen
Yeah, what about the Constitutionally required Swing Vote?

JFC these people are stupid.

150 posted on 10/05/2018 8:16:29 PM PDT by Mr.Unique (The government, by its very nature, cannot give except what it first takes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Where is the outrage for this -itch making a purely political statement. Oh, and if she wasn’t so political she could be the swing vote. Right, you can stop laughing any time.


151 posted on 10/05/2018 8:17:34 PM PDT by falcon99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen; All

It must be just KILLING HER that someone who CLERKED for her is now sitting NEXT to her on the Supreme Court!

Thank You, God! Thank You, President Trump! *SMILING*

Best. Election. Ever. EVER! MAGA!


152 posted on 10/05/2018 8:18:10 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (I don't have 'Hobbies.' I'm developing a robust Post-Apocalyptic skill set.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen
If justices followed the Constitution there would be no need for swing votes.

There! Fixed it!

154 posted on 10/05/2018 8:20:57 PM PDT by Taxman (We will never be a truly free people so long as we have the income tax and the IRS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

That’s right.. As ObaMAO once said.. Elections have consequences.


155 posted on 10/05/2018 8:21:32 PM PDT by DivineMomentsOfTruth ("There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily." -GW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Is she not sure if she’s a man or woman?


158 posted on 10/05/2018 8:24:25 PM PDT by CincyRichieRich (17...#1776)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Wait until the court is 6-3. Hillary would have that with this nominee and Kagan would not say a word.


159 posted on 10/05/2018 8:25:28 PM PDT by doug from upland (Why the hell isn't Hillary Rodham Clinton in prison yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

Speaking of “too partisan to be on the Court”.....


160 posted on 10/05/2018 8:26:23 PM PDT by Some Fat Guy in L.A. (Still bitterly clinging to rational thought despite it's unfashionability)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

That’s kind of the f****** point, my dear Justice.

L


161 posted on 10/05/2018 8:27:27 PM PDT by Lurker (President Trump isn't our last chance. President Trump is THEIR last chance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: yesthatjallen

So I guess Kagan is admitting she’s a political hack and votes liberal all the time?


162 posted on 10/05/2018 8:27:50 PM PDT by No Socialist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-146 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