PDA

View Full Version : Supreme Court to hear AZ illegal immigration



BonMallari
12-13-2011, 04:09 AM
looks like SCOTUS is going to be busy between now and election time..Looks like Justice Kegan has recused herself on this issue...if there is any doubt as to the importance of SCOTUS appointees just watch how this and the Healthcare issue play out in the courts

Gerry Clinchy
12-13-2011, 08:55 AM
Bon, it said that Kagan did not participate in the decision to hear the suit, but I wasn't clear that she is actually recusing herself from the case. She should, but it's not clear to me yet, that she is really going to do that.

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-13-2011, 09:43 AM
Sorry but she is, from everything I can tell..

And it is NOT good news, this effectivly (and I think it is planned) allows for a 4-4 tie in which case the 9th circuts decisions stand.....

Those old farts planned this and it is gonna screw AZ and the others.

Jake

BonMallari
12-13-2011, 10:18 AM
Sorry but she is, from everything I can tell..

And it is NOT good news, this effectivly (and I think it is planned) allows for a 4-4 tie in which case the 9th circuts decisions stand.....

Those old farts planned this and it is gonna screw AZ and the others.

Jake

that is why I am so against BHO getting re elected, the court is drawn the battle lines between political ideology, if he gets another appointment or even two on the next term,it will shape the country for decades..

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-13-2011, 12:02 PM
that is why I am so against BHO getting re elected, the court is drawn the battle lines between political ideology, if he gets another appointment or even two on the next term,it will shape the country for decades..

This is why I like Newt, he said that he would seriously consider doing what Jefferson did in 1803 and abolish the 9th circut (reform act of 1803 actually abolished 1/2 of all judges 18 of 35 Judges I do not know if it targeted the 9th circut, hell I don't even think it was called or it even was the 9th circut)

I think he has his eye on the ball with regards to what the "People" want, his way of getting there may differ with many people but I hope and feel that he will do it.

People may say he is "over the top" and that he lashes out at times, cant keep his cool...etc etc..

Or is it that he says what we all are thinking???? His track record with regard to personal issues isn't or may not be what we would like (but some of the people that cuss him about it, have done it themselves) and we hold him to a standard that we don't hold ourselves to...is that fair???

But you can't argue or get around the facts that he did what was needed to get the courtry going again and with the things he and congress did the country boomed...Job's were created, entitlements were curbed, debt paid back, and budgets were balanced and handed out to the levels of governement.

Jake

Gerry Clinchy
12-13-2011, 12:08 PM
Seems ludicrous that Supreme Court justices are appointed for life ... by the same guys that cannot serve in their jobs more than ten years.

I suppose the founding fathers expected them to be more non-partisan if they didn't have to worry about the popularity of their decisions due to being re-elected; but they may never have anticipated that the SCOTUS would end up having the kind of power that it has today ... seemingly able to re-write the Constitution without going through the amendment process.

Nor_Cal_Angler
12-13-2011, 12:14 PM
Seems ludicrous that Supreme Court justices are appointed for life ... by the same guys that cannot serve in their jobs more than ten years.

I suppose the founding fathers expected them to be more non-partisan if they didn't have to worry about the popularity of their decisions due to being re-elected; but they may never have anticipated that the SCOTUS would end up having the kind of power that it has today ... seemingly able to re-write the Constitution without going through the amendment process.

WINNER!!!!!!!!!!!!

BonMallari
12-13-2011, 02:34 PM
Seems ludicrous that Supreme Court justices are appointed for life ... by the same guys that cannot serve in their jobs more than ten years.

I suppose the founding fathers expected them to be more non-partisan if they didn't have to worry about the popularity of their decisions due to being re-elected; but they may never have anticipated that the SCOTUS would end up having the kind of power that it has today ... seemingly able to re-write the Constitution without going through the amendment process.

yes but thats what should make them apolitical....since they arent beholding to anyone...great in theory but not reality....I wouldnt mind seeing some sort of term limit on SCOTUS like 12-15 yrs, twenty at the most or even age specific....

Gerry Clinchy
12-13-2011, 07:09 PM
yes but thats what should make them apolitical....since they arent beholding to anyone...great in theory but not reality....I wouldnt mind seeing some sort of term limit on SCOTUS like 12-15 yrs, twenty at the most or even age specific....

In theory, that sounded like a good idea ... but in the reality, it has turned out that giving that much power even to a committee of 9 allows that "committee" to become the equivalent to a dictator,