Sad, the constitution doesn’t say you have to be a lawyer/judge to be a justice, kind of wished they would enforce that...
The legal profession would be much more honorable if lawyers were banned from it.
Lawyer are far above “ordinary” people who demand
accountability and Oaths meaning something.
The words mean nothing to lawyers or SCOTUS.
When SCOTUS is not pi$$ing on the grave on John Jay
by ignoring his explicit advice, and not overturning
Congress or the Constitution, they are ALWAYS available
to overturn the popular vote, too, like last week.
I thought you had the to represent yourself?
If you need to be a lawyer to know the law, then the defect is in the law, not in the citizenry.
Perhaps every law should pass through a citizen body - something like a jury.
The laws proponents and opponents would each submit test cases, and the citizen board would decide the outcome of the cases presented based on the law.
If the citizens on the board don’t reach 100% consensus on what the outcome of the test cases would be under the new law, then the legislature would have to rewrite it.
Years after his retirement, my step dad with a high school degree and no schooling in law, became the County Judge.
Law needs to be returned to the people.
An entire branch of government has now become the exclusive jurisdiction of a single profession. That’s really frightening, when you consider how over-reaching that branch has become in the past few decades. It’s also frightening when you consider how intellectually limited a legal education is. When a law is being drafted, thousands of people, from all walks of life, get involved in some way. That’s real “diversity”. Now, a single profession, operating from a sometimes bizarre paradigm, trumps the experts of all other professions, and “the People”.
It’s much the same in Canada; but, it wasn’t always so. Before we got our “written” Constitution, with it’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the principle that “Parliament is Supreme” was followed, as it still is in Britain. The Supreme Court of Canada could not overturn (most) laws passed directly by Parliament. The exceptions were federal laws that intruded on Provincial powers, or vice-versa.
We do have the so-called “notwithstanding” clause in our Constitution. It essentially says: notwithstanding whatever the Courts have to say about this matter, this law will stand. The “notwithstanding” clause was put in, to assure defenders of Parliamentary supremacy that the Courts wouldn’t be usurping the top spot (like the SCOTUS had often done). Unfortunately (IMHO) the “notwithstanding” clause has only been used once (by Quebec, to protect some of their anti-English language laws), although it has been invoked about a dozen times. Politicians are afraid to pull the trigger, lest they be accused of supporting “unconstitutional” laws. At least Parliament still has that trump card in reserve; and that seems to be keeping the SCOC from going completely power mad.
If we follow Shakespeare’s advice their wont be anyone to argue at the SC.
Does this mean that even the great Clinton cannot address the SC — because he has been disbarred?
How about the functionally disbarred, who have purportedly “voluntarily” surrendered their law licenses?
The people’s highest court...but only for labor union members known as lawyers.
Well, obviously they don’t want a perfect world...............
translation: Begone, Peasant Peons. We have not the time of day for ye.
Scum is not allowed to talk to nobility.
Yet another branch of government working to insulate itself from the rabble and great unwashed.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The Supreme Court is part of the government. I question the Constitutionality of this decision.
So WE usually don’t have standing in cases which affect ALL Americans and now only a certain class of Americans can air their grievances against this corrupt government to the USiC (United States Inferior Court).
Bad enough MOST of their decisions are 100% political as proven by the endless stream of 5-4 decisions and the number of times they have slapped US Citizens in the face by telling them they do not have standing but now only special people can stand in front of these 9 traitors.
How many more branches of government must turn on us, how many more agencies must actively work against us before we overturn this government?
While there still is a thread of the 2nd Amendment remaining, a Thomas Jefferson moment would seem to be the only solution as most of these power crazed filth are NOT elected.