• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

(Poll) JD Vance: judges cannot "tell the American people they’re not allowed to have what they voted for"

Can judges "tell the American people they're not allowed to have what they voted for"

  • Total voters
    88
rahl said:
The facts have been explained to you. You keep repeating hilariously ignorant nonsense.

FEDERAL judges ruling on FEDERAL laws apply FEDERALLY, which is nationwide. This is basic civics.
Click to expand...
Excerpt from the SCOTUS order dismissing the case of 5 detainees held in Texas forum shopped to the DC DISTRICT court.

"The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia. As a result, the Government is likely to succeed on the merits of this action…."

Supreme Court Vacates Judge Boasberg's TROs As To Tren de Aragua Under Alien Enemies Act

Holds venue was improper in DC District Court, case needs to go to Texas, where the TdA members are being held pending removal. But confirms they do get some due process to contest whether they are gang members subject to summary removal.
legalinsurrection.com

Of course to the Orange Man Bad lynch mob any puffed up Federal judge in any district can override the duely elected President.
 

Speaking of basic civics: The Constitution IS federal law. Jeez, dude!
 
Noodlegawd said:
Speaking of basic civics: The Constitution IS federal law. Jeez, dude!
Click to expand...
Which means when a Federal judge makes a ruling, that ruling applies to the whole country, not just a portion of the country. That means EVERYBODY, including the president is obligated to obey the ruling.
 
You need to actually read the ruling. Nothing here contradicted a single word in my post.
 
rahl said:
You need to actually read the ruling. Nothing here contradicted a single word in my post.
Click to expand...
From your post #159

"FEDERAL judges ruling on FEDERAL laws apply FEDERALLY, which is nationwide. This is basic civics."

Emphasis added.

The SCOTUS decision struck down a TRO issued by a DC district court judge for detainees held in Texas because the case was not filed in the appropriate venue. That directly contradicts your claim. Read carefully
 
You need to read the ruling. That isn’t what SCOTUS ruled.

Meanwhile, federal district rulings apply nationwide regarding federal law. This is basic stuff. Please take a middle school civics class.
 
Ganondagan said:
Yes, federal courts deal with federal issues but that isn't the real issue at hand is it? The real issue is politicization of the system through judge shopping.
Click to expand...

The real issue is with you moving the goalposts.

Trump is politicizing the system by using it to go after his enemies.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
Which means when a Federal judge makes a ruling, that ruling applies to the whole country, not just a portion of the country. That means EVERYBODY, including the president is obligated to obey the ruling.
Click to expand...

Around and around we go.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
Because YOU say so? That's rich.

Obey the order. Appeal the order. Get it to SCOTUS. They will set those leftist commie pinko Trump hating judges straight. Ain't thatr right, NG?
Click to expand...

What am I saying that's not a fact? Do or do you not you think that CA should obey the ruling of a Texas federal judge that laws banning 11-round magazines or assault weapons are unconstitutional?
 
Somebody ought to grab JD Vance and let him know that instead of going after judges for doing their jobs, he ought to be going after his Republican buddies and pals down in the Missouri legislature. They are working right now to override voter approved ballot measures on abortion and paid sick leave and minimum wages.

Talk about a sham. The people spoke through their votes, and the jackals in the legislature are just going to ignore the measures because they want to.

Welcome to Missouri, where the vote of the people is never safe • Missouri Independent

Maybe you collected signatures last year so that Missourians could vote to overturn the state’s abortion ban. Maybe you walked door to door asking voters to support paid sick leave benefits for lower-wage workers. Maybe you were one of millions of people who successfully voted to pass those...
missouriindependent.com
 
Lol these fascist **** bags will be in for a real rude awakening when they realize they don't have the mandate they think they have.

In fact, doing all kinds of tyrannical, fascist nonsense while ALSO simultaneously screwing the masses economically seems to me like they intend to speedrun the French Revolution arc.
 
Lethargic Aptitude said:
What the VP is saying is that he promotes a dictatorship rule of the majority. Too bad he never read the Federalist Papers.
Click to expand...
Fascits don't care.


Every time this couch ****er opens his mouth I understand why his father didn't bother with him and his mother loved pills more.
 
What that the question?
 
BUT...the current Congress is being neutered by...?
Not legally but here we are, we are being governed by buffoons.
 
Noodlegawd said:
What am I saying that's not a fact? Do or do you not you think that CA should obey the ruling of a Texas federal judge that laws banning 11-round magazines or assault weapons are unconstitutional?
Click to expand...
I already answered the question, but I'll endulge you once again. EVERYONE has to obey a federal court order. No exceptions. Not you, not me, not California, not president Trump. No exceptions.

What part of EVERYONE do you not understand?
 
Stealers Wheel said:
I already answered the question, but I'll endulge you once again. EVERYONE has to obey a federal court order. No exceptions. Not you, not me, not California, not president Trump. No exceptions.

What part of EVERYONE do you not understand?
Click to expand...

That's not even remotely close to being true, which is no surprise. What I don't understand is (1) why you're suddenly complaining about it now, and (2) why you think individual judges should have so much power.
 
A qualified NO vote.
If the only thing Leftist partisan judges do is thwart Trump every time the president tries to do something beneficial, then they should not

"tell the American people they're not allowed to have what they voted for"​

 
Noodlegawd said:
That's not even remotely close to being true, which is no surprise. What I don't understand is (1) why you're suddenly complaining about it now, and (2) why you think individual judges should have so much power.
Click to expand...
Believe me, there's a whole lot more you don't understand.

There are two more levels of courts ABOVE a federal district judge. All you have to do is employ the appellate system and get at least one of those higher courts to overrule the federal judge. In the meantime, we obey the court orders. The system is designed SPECIFICALLY to limit the power of individual judges. So where is the 'so much power' you mentioned?
 
Do you really believe there should be 1770 federal judges having the power to prevent the president from exercising presidential power in this country?

======================================
The United States federal courts are the system of courts organized under the United States Constitution and federal law. The federal courts decide disputes involving the Constitution and laws passed by Congress.

Altogether, there are nearly 1,770 judgeships authorized across the 209 courts in the federal court system. About half of the judges sitting on federal courts are appointed by the president of the United States for life terms. The remaining judges are selected by judges sitting on circuit or district courts for terms of defined lengths.

United States federal courts

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
ballotpedia.org
 
jaypatriot said:
A qualified NO vote.
If the only thing Leftist partisan judges do is thwart Trump every time the president tries to do something beneficial, then they should not

"tell the American people they're not allowed to have what they voted for"​

Click to expand...
The American people voted for scrapping the Constitution and the rule of law. Is that what they voted for?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…