Posted on 02/23/2017 8:30:03 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Even when Gorsuch is seated we still have the untrustworthy Roberts to contend with.
Term limits when we can have the Constitutional Convention.
Hotair fake news.
The only thing they `gutted’ was their own integrity credibility by ignoring plain, recent black-letter stare decisis (the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent).
All it is is more left-wing judicial activism spitting on the law.
Scotus will reverse it. The 4th is making stuff up as they go.
This is an old trick. SCOTUS can ignore the issue, like it did with appeals courts reading Presser for the opposite of what it said.
You’ve noticed that too I see.
It seems to be the fakebook/youtube effect. Starting a sentence with the words “so”, or “well”, and ending a sentence with the word or statement “right?” just irritates me to no end.
“This sort of claptrap coming from the lower courts must be kept in check.”
I believe the activist judges on the 4th Circuit made the judgement that the Supreme Court would split 4-4 thus resulting in their ruling standing. So, yes we have to get Gorsuch seated right away.
This is actually the reason the Left and the #FakeStreamMedia [but I repeat myself...] are committing sedition in front of God and everybody - they had the Supreme Court in the palm of their murderous hands, and it was snatched away by President Trump.
Five partisan Progtard #FakeJudges were going to tell EVERYONE in the United States when to sit up, roll over, and play dead.
I maintain that the Democrats/#FakeStreamMedia are going to dispute the seating of EVERY Trump Supreme Court nominee on the grounds that President Trump is "illegitimate".
Scott Adams, Master Persuader, identifies the use of "so" at the beginning of a sentence as a "tell" for "cognitive dissonance".
Much of the time, it's a restatement of the actual facts or quote to create a strawman which can be attacked.
Thanks. I’m in good company.
Interesting. I’ll have to check out his blog sometime.
Thanks for point me in his direction.
>
The only thing they `gutted’ was their own integrity credibility by ignoring plain, recent black-letter stare decisis (the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent).
All it is is more left-wing judicial activism spitting on the law.
>
F* that. The only ‘stare decisis’ they had to ‘noodle over’ is the Law of the Land: “keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
No other precedent need be consulted.
Now, where’s our worthless, POS D.C. ‘leaders’ and the AGs of each State (not that I expect much from my home state of MD) to remove, like the 9th, those whom no longer judge but write ‘law’??
I went to high school in Maryland (Friendly, Oxon Hill, south of DC). The state is infested with Democrats.
Whether you like it or not, about 2000 years of Anglo-American jurisprudence involves `black letter’ law (statutes) and case law, with statutes taking precedence but stare decisis helping resolve disputes.
As you recognize, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are the final authority.
My point is that the Fourth thumbed its nose at Heller. This will go up.
So what do you do with TEN FAKE judges who refuse to follow the Constitution? ... all ten of these fakers should be impeached. They are activists clothed in black robes.
Even when Gorsuch is seated we still have the untrustworthy Roberts to contend with.
Awfully strange that someone as allegedly as bright as him so tortured the English language and common sense reasoning to uphold ObamaCare!
Why hasn’t Gorsuch been approved by now? McConnell could get it done.
Circuit courts cannot rule against a SCOTUS ruling.
Their opinion is null and void.
.
Black shirt/robe enemies of USA. Really is that simple. Continuing to work to remove the clear right of USA citizens to own firearms, for their protection from any criminals, including unlawful government agents. And protection of USConstitution, insisting that it is the supreme law of the land; black shirts aren’t.
“...In a 10–4 decision, issued yesterday afternoon, the court upheld Maryland’s ban on both “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazines.” By so doing, it deprived the people of Maryland, the Carolinas, and the Virginias of the core protections to which the Constitution entitles them. ...”
Time for folks in those states to raise a ruckus.
Lurkinanloomin wrote: “This is also 180 degrees around from the Miller decision in the 1930’s that upheld the NFA because the short-barreled shotgun was found to NOT be a military weapon.”
That isn’t what the court said in Miller: “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.”
The court said that the shotgun in question would have been protected if it had “some reasonable relationship” to the militia. The court, in effect, said, no evidence had been presented to that effect and the court couldn’t just assume that it was.
In effect, the 4th circuit is adopting the favorite argument of the gun banners that the 2nd only protects weapons of the militia.
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.