Supreme Court decision of the day

[Taylor]

3 hours ago, cals said:

No, Jay isn’t stupid.

I wasn't disagreeing with you. I trust that you have more knowledge of constitutional law than the rest of us.

[Blarg]

Fox News is crack to those that need confirmation bias. 

[Blarg]

3 minutes ago, Taylor said:

I wasn't disagreeing with you. I trust that you have more knowledge of constitutional law than the rest of us.

@wopphil, thoughts?

[Taylor]

Just now, Blarg said:

@wopphil, thoughts?

*besides @wopphil

[Dtwncbad]

1 minute ago, Blarg said:

Fox News is crack to those that need confirmation bias. 

Basically yes.  Ratings whores.  But no worse than the other networks on the other side.  At the very least Fox will actually let a liberal talk on their programs though.  But that’s a small side note.

 

 

[Dtwncbad]

7 minutes ago, Taylor said:

I wasn't disagreeing with you. I trust that you have more knowledge of constitutional law than the rest of us.

Somebody that went to law school would certainly be more likely to know constitutional law more than someone that didn’t.

That, however, has almost nothing to do with the fact that everybody should attempt to pay attention and not be afraid to have opinions.  We all vote.  I would hope everybody would have some things to say about law related things since we elect legislators and Presidents that appoint justices.

Edited May 31, 2022 by Dtwncbad

[Taylor]

4 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Somebody that went to law school would certainly be more likely to know constitutional law more than someone that didn’t.

That, however, has almost nothing to do with the fact that everybody should attempt to pay attention and not be afraid to have opinions.  We all vote.  I would hope everybody would have some things to say about law related things since we elect legislators and Presidents that appoint justices.

I agree but it's ridiculous to think conservatives are somehow more objective about their reading of the Constitution than liberals. As if they don't have a similar activist agenda.

[Dtwncbad]

4 minutes ago, Taylor said:

I agree but it's ridiculous to think conservatives are somehow more objective about their reading of the Constitution than liberals. As if they don't have a similar activist agenda.

I think I have explicitly said more than once in this thread. . . .

I don’t want political judges.  They do exist.  Of course. 

I was pointing out that using the word “conservative” to describe a judge gets messy because the least political/most “objective” judge would be labeled a “conservative” judge.

Edited May 31, 2022 by Dtwncbad

[Taylor]

17 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I think I have explicitly said more than once in this thread. . . .

I don’t want political judges.  They do exist.  Of course. 

I was pointing out that using the word “conservative” to describe a judge gets messy because the least political/most “objective” judge would be labeled a “conservative” judge.

Okay. And your argument started because you objected to how I defined the SC decision around new evidence along party lines.

Do you believe any of the current SC justices are conservative in the traditional sense of the world?

[Dtwncbad]

11 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Okay. And your argument started because you objected to how I defined the SC decision around new evidence along party lines.

Do you believe any of the current SC justices are conservative in the traditional sense of the world?

Tough to answer.

My guess is some of the “conservative” judges are likely pretty political and hide behind being constructionists while I believe there are also some judges that do actually attempt to be constructionists.

Those would be pretty different judges and yet they might look a lot alike.

I favor trying to be as literal as possible (again as possible) on the document because if you don’t do that, then what is the value of the document at all?  Just have the judges rule based on whatever they want to do?

The Supreme Court is kind of fascinating. . .

[wopphil]

8 hours ago, Blarg said:

@wopphil, thoughts?

I actually did well in Con Law in law school (can’t say that about most of my other classes), but don’t follow it now nearly as much as I should. Employment law is my thing. Cals could probably school me on the Constitution. 

[tdawg87]

50 minutes ago, wopphil said:

I actually did well in Con Law in law school (can’t say that about most of my other classes), but don’t follow it now nearly as much as I should. Employment law is my thing. Cals could probably school me on the Constitution. 

Very sad.

[cals]

1 hour ago, wopphil said:

I actually did well in Con Law in law school (can’t say that about most of my other classes), but don’t follow it now nearly as much as I should. Employment law is my thing. Cals could probably school me on the Constitution. 

I’m no real expert anymore either. I just want everyone to know most, if not all judges (these days, at least) have an outcome in mind first and find a way to bend and mold the legal precedent and the text of the document itself to reach that conclusion.  They have a political position first and the legal reasoning comes second, which is backwards.  

It is what it is, but listening to Carlsbad spew Fox propaganda that good conservatives follow strict constructionism and don’t do exactly what the more liberal judges do was becoming annoying so I felt the need to say something.  Now that I’ve put him in his place and made him look like a jackass I’ll step back on this topic again and let the amateurs discuss.

[gotbeer]

 

[Kotchman]

16 minutes ago, cals said:

I’m no real expert anymore either. I just want everyone to know most, if not all judges (these days, at least) have an outcome in mind first and find a way to bend and mold the legal precedent and the text of the document itself to reach that conclusion.  They have a political position first and the legal reasoning comes second, which is backwards.  

It is what it is, but listening to Carlsbad spew Fox propaganda that good conservatives follow strict constructionism and don’t do exactly what the more liberal judges do was becoming annoying so I felt the need to say something.  Now that I’ve put him in his place and made him look like a jackass I’ll step back on this topic again and let the amateurs discuss.

This is very true. I’m probably guilty of pointing out the lefty judges when they all do it. The rights frustration is we’ve picked a few duds like Roberts. He hasn’t towed the conservative line and his opinions seem to be influenced more with popularity than constitutional precedent. His decisions are as politically biased as any liberal judge. He’s in the business of establishment status quo politics  see  Obamacare and Trumps appeal. Cons sometimes view this as our judges having an open mind but the reality is we selected judges with political opinions that don’t match ours. 

[katie]

Nobody calls it “downtown Carlsbad”

[AngelsLakersFan]

3 minutes ago, katie said:

Nobody calls it “downtown Carlsbad”

One guy does

[cals]

6 minutes ago, katie said:

Nobody calls it “downtown Carlsbad”

He ha, then he misnamed himself!

[cals]

23 minutes ago, Kotchman said:

This is very true. I’m probably guilty of pointing out the lefty judges when they all do it. The rights frustration is we’ve picked a few duds like Roberts. He hasn’t towed the conservative line and his opinions seem to be influenced more with popularity than constitutional precedent. His decisions are as politically biased as any liberal judge. He’s in the business of establishment status quo politics  see  Obamacare and Trumps appeal. Cons sometimes view this as our judges having an open mind but the reality is we selected judges with political opinions that don’t match ours. 

They all do it man, there is no impartiality anymore from either side. And like I said, it is what it is.  But Tucker and his minions need to man up and admit the right is doing it, too.  We are men of action, KC.  Lies do not become us.

[Dtwncbad]

10 hours ago, cals said:

I’m no real expert anymore either. I just want everyone to know most, if not all judges (these days, at least) have an outcome in mind first and find a way to bend and mold the legal precedent and the text of the document itself to reach that conclusion.  They have a political position first and the legal reasoning comes second, which is backwards.  

It is what it is, but listening to Carlsbad spew Fox propaganda that good conservatives follow strict constructionism and don’t do exactly what the more liberal judges do was becoming annoying so I felt the need to say something.  Now that I’ve put him in his place and made him look like a jackass I’ll step back on this topic again and let the amateurs discuss.

[Dtwncbad]

8 hours ago, katie said:

Nobody calls it “downtown Carlsbad”

For the record, it was a tongue in cheek nickname among some friends.  A buddy of mine had a house in Glendora where he had a “graffiti room” off the garage.  All of his friends were expected to sneak into the graffiti room at some point and use the spray paint to tag the wall based on where they lived.  So it’s a joke.  As if “downtown” Carlsbad is the rough part of town.

[Lhalo]

The tolerant left…

 

[Jason]

7 minutes ago, Lhalo said:

The tolerant left…

 

The leak of the ruling serving it's purpose 

[gotbeer]

31 minutes ago, Lhalo said:

The tolerant left…

 

Hopefully he gets charged with trying to overthrow the government.  

[Taylor]

35 minutes ago, Lhalo said:

The tolerant left…

 

Domestic terrorists come in all shapes and sizes.