- Joined
- Apr 25, 2010
- Messages
- 80,422
- Reaction score
- 29,077
- Location
- Pittsburgh
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
The governor has announced there will be no punishment of judges regardless of their decision.
Which, unlike SCOTUS, was the correct call.
Governor Bentley announced that "he" would not punish Probate Judges refusing the Federal Court order.
He cannot say "there will be no punishment", depending on how the contempt case(s) turn out - he has no control over penalties issued by a Federal court.
(Just pointing out the minor correction)
>>>>
Again, the "equal protection" clause simply does not apply in this situation: http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-constitution/215175-scotus-moderate-decision-ssm-3.html#post1064246097.
Governor Bentley announced that "he" would not punish Probate Judges refusing the Federal Court order.
He cannot say "there will be no punishment", depending on how the contempt case(s) turn out - he has no control over penalties issued by a Federal court.
It's about time there was an uprising against the all powerful federal government. They've been grabbing power that they were never supposed to have for hundreds of years. I think we need some amendments that give the States a much quicker route to knock the feds back when they do what they are not allowed to do. And all these judges, including the Supreme Court, need to have limited terms and an a better check against their actions.
It's about time there was an uprising against the all powerful federal government. They've been grabbing power that they were never supposed to have for hundreds of years. I think we need some amendments that give the States a much quicker route to knock the feds back when they do what they are not allowed to do. And all these judges, including the Supreme Court, need to have limited terms and an a better check against their actions.
It's about time there was an uprising against the all powerful federal government. They've been grabbing power that they were never supposed to have for hundreds of years. I think we need some amendments that give the States a much quicker route to knock the feds back when they do what they are not allowed to do. And all these judges, including the Supreme Court, need to have limited terms and an a better check against their actions.
Do you want all judges to be elected rather than appointed?
Do you want all judges to be elected rather than appointed?
That gay marriage is just NOW coming in to play reflects cultural shifts, and it goes to show that the constitution can be interpreted BOTH to include and exclude gay marriage.
Gay marriage has been illegal for years, and that was the law of the land, and we had the 14th amendment. So what changed?
Activism, and cultural shifts.
So, fine. But let the activists stay in their own damn states. Alabama wants nothing to do with you, and it will only come back to bite you.
I think he's right about the better check. Certainly there should be an easier way to overturn SCOTUS decisions than the full Amendment Process. I'm thinking a supermajority of Congress w/ a Presidential Signature ought to be a good (tentative) step.
No, they can still be appointed, just not for life. We don't need that. Plus, sometimes it just time to go. People retire from their jobs when they get too old, many of these guys stay past their usefulness.
Please, for the love of all things holy, change your "Lean" description. There is no way in hell that you are a left-leaning libertarian.
Sounds more like right-wing authoritarian to me.
Sometimes I change my "lean" to the exact opposite, just for fun. It's interesting to see the difference in the responses you get.
I feel the same about "undisclosed." People sometimes act like they've discovered some major scandal and point out that I'm liberal. Why are you hiding behind undisclosed, deuce?
The proposals vary, but the best loved seems to be for staggered 18-year terms. At the end of the term, the Justice would take senior status. The nine junior Justices would comprise the “deciding” portion of the Court. Each President would get two appointments every term.
The governor has announced there will be no punishment of judges regardless of their decision.
Which, unlike SCOTUS, was the correct call.
That's fine, but the US isn't governed by the Bible, nor any other fictitious writings of old.
Oh yeah.....I'm not homophobic as liberals like to label those who live believing in the Bible. It's just the belief that a marriage is between a Man and Woman as stated in the Bible.
The governor has announced there will be no punishment of judges regardless of their decision.
Which, unlike SCOTUS, was the correct call.
I will never understand why a man sitting in Europe, as you are, thinks he can lord over and dictate to the people of Alabama how they are supposed to live in their own state. The ego some of you guys have astounds me.
Well it really depends on the context of the case, doesn't it? Oh my bad... must be something they teach when you get into that 8th grade social studies class.
But why does that belief have to translate into denying other people the right to marry the person they want? Why is your moral disapproval enough to restrict individual liberty?
Ficticious writings? Hmmmm
Show me where I'm wrong where gay marriage was legal 20 years ago. This country WAS founded on Judeo-Christian values, no doubt about that.
I can't help if the uber liberal values of this country are morphing our country to something it once wasn't.
Oh yeah.....I'm not homophobic as liberals like to label those who live believing in the Bible. It's just the belief that a marriage is between a Man and Woman as stated in the Bible.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?