A huge Supreme Court decision you never heard of: Liberals are freaking out

American Thinker ^ | 05/16/2019 | Peter Skurkiss

[FreeReign]

Thomas is an originalist more than he is a conservative. A Court conservative, at least how liberals would define one, would honor the principle of stare decisis. This means that once a decision is made, it stays made. Thomas instead approaches cases according to the original intent of the Founding Fathers. He believes if an initial decision was wrong per the original intent of the Constitution, it should be overturned.

Liberals think that conservatives want to "conserve" unconstitutional decisions and that we believe in stare decisis?

Nevermind that a conservative (speaking for myself) really wants to "conserve" the original intent of the Constitution.

[RipSawyer]

I have long believed that words have real meanings that do not change with use. The way some people seem to look at things is that if the word “cool” appeared in the constitution it would no longer mean a relatively low temperature but would, in current understanding, mean something trendy and desirable and therefore the meaning of the law would change accordingly. Maybe I’m just a grumpy old man and I’m not “cool”.

[Stravinsky]

You are absolutely correct.

Roberts is the type of justice who would join the liberals to preserve Roe if it came down to a 5-4 decision, but would probably be the 6th vote to overturn Roe if a female conservative replaced Ginsburg just so he could make sure the opinion was assigned to that woman because a female being the author would provide “his” court some cover from criticism. IOW, he doesn’t give a darn about the legal principles involved.

[Chode]

[Bullish]

He's giving the left the nightmares they deserve. We should all work hard to give Trump re-election, the house and a filibuster proof Senate.

We can do it!