General Live Now: ACB Supreme Court Nomination Confirmation Vote

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

Greenbean

Posting Machine
Nov 14, 2015
2,861
4,185
Maybe they didn't commit treason thats why he hasn't done it.......
So, let's pretend that trump's entire story about being illegally spied on is true, you think that the Dems should all skate? Nothing was outside of the law?
 

ThatOneDude

Commander in @Chief, Dick Army
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
35,390
34,272
So, let's pretend that trump's entire story about being illegally spied on is true, you think that the Dems should all skate? Nothing was outside of the law?
I do not think all dems should be held accountable for the actions of a few if that is the case.
 

Greenbean

Posting Machine
Nov 14, 2015
2,861
4,185
I'm sure they are building their case.
I think that this is where we disagree. I think that they have a case but I don't think it will go anywhere. I'd love to be wrong. But throughout history, there have always been rulers and peasants. One set of laws for the rulers and another set for the peasants. Just the way it is. Hillary smashed evidence with a hammer after being subpoenaed. If me or you did that we would have a big ol schlong in us in prison as we are typing this.
 

Mr Smokalotapotamus

You gonna pass that bro??
Jun 23, 2018
1,771
2,017
I think that this is where we disagree. I think that they have a case but I don't think it will go anywhere. I'd love to be wrong. But throughout history, there have always been rulers and peasants. One set of laws for the rulers and another set for the peasants. Just the way it is. Hillary smashed evidence with a hammer after being subpoenaed. If me or you did that we would have a big ol schlong in us in prison as we are typing this.
We agree my friend. Wishful thinking on my part.
 

MMAHAWK

Real Gs come from California.America Muthafucker
Feb 5, 2015
15,098
32,957
No, I would. I think the idea that partisan presidents appoint justices means it will always be partisan.
Are you saying that if I searched your OG, Facebook,or posts here I’d find a post saying that the liberal court should be packed and term limits?
 

Splinty

Shake 'em off
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
44,116
91,095
Ideally lifetime appointments would lead to an absence of bias in the judicial branch.
I think that's the point.
I've always worried about the term 'activist judges'. I felt like this was a very strange accusation when I watch Republicans champion their conservative choice. I thought the point was to choose a judge that is consistent with legal precedent? How could choosing somebody intentionally as conservative not be an activist action?

But it's also true that it's within the Constitution to make that court whatever number of bodies needed to appropriately represent America.

Each body dilutes the vote. And maybe that's a good thing too.
Currently the six conservative judges (by way if senator population representation) represent less Americans than the three less conservative judges. normally that shouldn't matter since judges aren't elected and aren't representatives of the people. But it is concerning that both the presidency is chosen by the minority, the senate, and the judicial branch.
Even in a representative Republic you would expect to see a translation of democratic votes into proportional representation in general theme and trend.

The moderating saucer plate of the Senate has an arguable role to remain. But I have a hard time justifying the increasing divide between citizen wishes and an executive branch and a judicial branch that are chosen by an amplified antidemocratic minority. Regardless you find the majority voice only appearing in the house. And surely that isn't the intent of a representative Republic.
 

ThatOneDude

Commander in @Chief, Dick Army
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
35,390
34,272
Ideally lifetime appointments would lead to an absence of bias in the judicial branch.
I think that's the point.
I've always worried about the term 'activist judges'. I felt like this was a very strange accusation when I watch Republicans champion their conservative choice. I thought the point was to choose a judge that is consistent with legal precedent? How could choosing somebody intentionally as conservative not be an activist action?

But it's also true that it's within the Constitution to make that court whatever number of bodies needed to appropriately represent America.

Each body dilutes the vote. And maybe that's a good thing too.
Currently the six conservative judges (by way if senator population representation) represent less Americans than the three less conservative judges. normally that shouldn't matter since judges aren't elected and aren't representatives of the people. But it is concerning that both the presidency is chosen by the minority, the senate, and the judicial branch.
Even in a representative Republic you would expect to see a translation of democratic votes into proportional representation in general theme and trend.

The moderating saucer plate of the Senate has an arguable role to remain. But I have a hard time justifying the increasing divide between citizen wishes and an executive branch and a judicial branch that are chosen by an amplified antidemocratic minority. Regardless you find the majority voice only appearing in the house. And surely that isn't the intent of a representative Republic.
Do you think Judge Amy is an activist judge?
 

Splinty

Shake 'em off
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
44,116
91,095
Do you think Judge Amy is an activist judge?
I don't know. I've got no say in it, there was no stopping it. So I didn't waste my time watching the confirmation. She's going to be a supreme Court Justice no matter what.


I think that it seems a double standard to complain about activist judges while also championing how conservative your picks are. I can't remember hearing anyone brag about how liberal their picks are. I think my point is that it just confirms these are political appointments and not the neutral justice above all selections that you imagine.
 

ThatOneDude

Commander in @Chief, Dick Army
First 100
Jan 14, 2015
35,390
34,272
I don't know. I've got no say in it, there was no stopping it. So I didn't waste my time watching the confirmation. She's going to be a supreme Court Justice no matter what.


I think that it seems a double standard to complain about activist judges while also championing how conservative your picks are. I can't remember hearing anyone brag about how liberal their picks are. I think my point is that it just confirms these are political appointments and not the neutral justice above all selections that you imagine.
I agree, judges should be neutral politically and follow the "document" and legal precedence. i think Judge Amy doe's that and was a fine pick. I do understand the apprehension of why people were upset about Trump selecting a judge this close to the election, but there's nothing legally stopping him from doing it. I wish Judge Amy was judged on her body of work, and not because Trump selected her.