HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 7,827
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Roberts is right.
Must be a presidential thing…I’m guessing you’ll not agree w CATOlol, rule of law. Invoking the alien enemies act is an end run around rule of law. trump gives zero fucks about rule of law unless he can use it for his own benefit.
What's your point? If one president broke the law, another gets to break it more?Must be a presidential thing…I’m guessing you’ll not agree w CATO
I guess it’s a matter of whose ox is getting gored eh Jo?
What's your point? If one president broke the law, another gets to break it more?
People can have opinions about whether he should or shouldn’t have said it, but judges have 1st amendment rights just like the rest of us. I agree with his comment but don’t see it as a big deal.Yes.
But he should have kept his mouth shut.
People can have opinions about whether he should or shouldn’t have said it, but judges have 1st amendment rights just like the rest of us. I agree with his comment but don’t see it as a big deal.
But SCOTUS doesn’t have a formal rule of ethics. This has been a taking point because of the shady crap they are up to. Clarence Thomas being the worst of them. Who said it is not the point. The point is some finally did and the man that occupies the Oval Office is not going after one member of SCOTUS without the rest of them acting like brothers and sisters to protect each other. The bottom line is that the Orange Cheeto thinks he is above the law and wants to be a dictator. If you don’t see that, then your head is in the sandThere's an ethics rule involved. SCOTUS justices should refrain from public comment on political issues or matters which may come before them.
This is the claim they ALL make during their confirmation hearings. Roberts should have kept his DAMNED mouth shut because it completely destroys anyone in future confirmation hearings from making the claim of neutrality.
But SCOTUS doesn’t have a formal rule of ethics.
To some extent, yes. I imagine no presidents hand are squeaky clean. But I’m confident in saying that history will reveal a huge difference between trump an Obama in this arena.Must be a presidential thing…I’m guessing you’ll not agree w CATO
I guess it’s a matter of whose ox is getting gored eh Jo?
I'm not the one who bought up the IKYABWAI defence. I'm also not the one defending the use of the IKYABWAI defence, now am I?I think it's more a matter of STFU with your whining merely because you don't support the current President.
The Chief Justice or any other Judge has no business commenting on a political matter such as the impeachment process which is wholly a function of the Congress, not the judiciary.Roberts can have his opinion! It's only an opinion! No federal judge has the authority over the executive branch. None of them! If they did, why have a president? End of story! Buckle up Beuttercup, the fun hasent even started yet!!![]()
Well Roberts has twice slapped down Trump, he's on the SCOTUS, so I guess he disagree's with you.The Chief Justice or any other Judge has no business commenting on a political matter such as the impeachment process which is wholly a function of the Congress, not the judiciary.
The other two branches of government have methodologies for disciplining their officers and employees. The judiciary should also have such a disciplinary enforcement arm to punish breaches of conduct that might not reach the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors.Not true. Because of the recent social outcry, SCOTUS created ethic rules and now requires all of the justices to adhere to them.
Roberts just violated those rules. Oopsie.
Of course he does. It's specifically regarding political comments made about the judiciary branch.The Chief Justice or any other Judge has no business commenting on a political matter such as the impeachment process which is wholly a function of the Congress, not the judiciary.
No he doesn't. He should be shutting these rogue judges down for stepping out of their lane of authority.Of course he does. It's specifically regarding political comments made about the judiciary branch.
There are no rogue judges. If they don't like the judges orders, they can appeal. Roberts just reiterated that.No he doesn't. He should be shutting these rogue judges down for stepping out of their lane of authority.
Judges have no authority over the President when he is exercising his Article II powers. When the President is acting at the apex of his authority the authority of the Judicial branch is at its nadir.And the executive branch doesn’t have authority over the Judiciary. I am Tired of people that complain when someone disagrees with the Cheeto. I mean If he wants to ignore a lawful order by a court that is well within the purview of the court then I guess Those executive orders are as good as as the toilet paper I use To wipe myself. Those aren’t law anyway. I cannot Wait for y’all to be crying when all of your civil liberties are taking away thinking it was not going to affect you. Viva la revoluscion!!!!
I use Icy Hot Max.What's a back account? And how do you freeze it?
If not that the Appellate Level. There is no way the President who is equal to the SCOTUS and the Congress should have to take direction from an inferior federal court judge.An epiphany has occurred to me.
CONGRESS needs to stop pussy footing around with the BS and put a Bill on the floor removing jurisdiction for Federal suits from the Federal judiciary and transferring it exclusively to SCOTUS. In essence, if you want to sue the administrative branch of the gov, you have to file directly with SCOTUS unless there's another court which has subject matter jurisdiction. (ie; court of federal claims for contract issues.) Put in the Bill that current claims against the US administrative branch cannot be transferred to the SCOTUS, they must be dismissed and any judicial orders dissolved and the parties must refile original claims with the High Court.
Get that bill past each house without modification or amendments and have it on Trump's desk by next Friday for his signature.
END of rogue judges.
Best part is that SCOTUS won't hear the cases.
If not that the Appellate Level. There is no way the President who is equal to the SCOTUS and the Congress should have to take direction from an inferior federal court judge.
PS: How many on the left went nuts when Joe Biden defied the SCOTUS on student loans? How many will shit their pants if Trump does it?