The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31

Thread: Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,920

    Default Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=110103

    http://tinyurl.com/m976kf

    Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law
    'Beliefs and commitments' of nation's leader should supersede judges

    Posted: September 18, 2009

    By Aaron Klein
    2009 WorldNetDaily

    JERUSALEM The interpretation of federal law should be made not by judges but by the beliefs and commitments of the U.S. president and those around him, according to President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein.

    "There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him," argued Sunstein.

    -more-

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Eastern NC
    Posts
    2,755

    Default

    This must be a joke.
    ________
    brunette girl Webcams
    Last edited by ducknwork; 04-21-2011 at 05:41 PM.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Richard Halstead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Lino Lakes, MN north metro area
    Posts
    2,061

    Default

    Should'nt the judges rule rather than the president or has the executive branch have too much power.

    In an ideal system the excutive, congress, Supreme have a balance of power.
    Senator Byrd Dem warned that the executive branch was out growing the balance of power.
    cave canem...beware of the dog
    Richard Halstead (halst001 at yahoo.com)

    http://www.browndogmafia.com/finalists.html

  4. #4
    Senior Member Bob Gutermuth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Transchoptankia, DEMOCRATIC Peoples Republic of Maryland
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    Sunstein is the same moron who wants to ban hunting and give animals lawyers and the right to sue humans. He belongs in the nut ward, not govt service.
    Bob Gutermuth
    Canvasback Chesapeakes
    ROLL TIDE!

  5. #5
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    That is as outrageous as Bush's similar beliefs. It should be noted that Sunstein is writing about an 1803 Supreme Court precedent and citing powers that he believes should rest with the President, whether that President be Obama, Bush, or someone as yet unknown.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,904

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    That is as outrageous as Bush's similar beliefs. It should be noted that Sunstein is writing about an 1803 Supreme Court precedent and citing powers that he believes should rest with the President, whether that President be Obama, Bush, or someone as yet unknown.
    But he seems to be saying that Supreme Court precedent, which is what we still go by, i.e. that the courts "interpret" the laws when question is raised is incorrect. Seems to me that was the whole premise of division of powers: legislative makes the laws; judicial interprets the laws; executive enforces the laws. No matter who is Pres, you get into trouble when you "obviate" one of the three branches.

    This fellow is a lawyer? No wonder there is confusion! Just when it seemed like Van Jones was the worst of the advisors yet, we get Sunstein.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Tulsa
    Posts
    683

    Default

    It is not up to the President, Judge, Attorney's, or even Congress to interpret law. That is left up to the juries for civil and criminal lawsuits giving their vote to either side of the arguement. We are in a common law society, and it is the commoners that say what will or will not be enforced.
    Terry Britton, P.E.

    Engineers believe that if it isn't broken, it doesn't have enough features yet.

  8. #8
    Senior Member M&K's Retrievers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Royse City, TX
    Posts
    5,155

    Default

    [QUOTE=YardleyLabs;That is as outrageous as Bush's similar beliefs.

    Say what? What similar beliefs? This should be good
    M&K's HR UH Tucker of Texoma JH
    M&K's SHR Prime Black Angus
    M&K's Miss Jessie Girl JH
    Sir Jacob of Lakeview-Jake
    Freeway JYD

    Mike Whitworth

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,920

    Default

    Terry-

    The term "common law" in fact refers to a body of law created by judges through their decisions in cases. This is as opposed to legislative law. Technically the term "common law" and "commoners" aren't related.....sort of like blind and blind.

    There is a heavy dependence common law or case law in the US system and what the law means is certainly determined by judges rather than juries. The jury is a trier of fact, not an interpretor of the law.

    No place is the President mentioned in any aspect of the US judicial system outside of the nomination of Federal judges. Once nominated, they are free agents. I don't think that the President can even withdraw a nomination without the nominee's agreement.

    This guy is truly scary.

    Eric

  10. #10
    Senior Member K G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    southeast us
    Posts
    5,354

    Default

    Why is it that liberals MUST mention Bush 43 whenever ANY mention of a dolt in the CURRENT administration comes up? WHY??????

    Good thing they'll only have about another 38 months to wear those blinders....

    kg
    I keep my PM box full. Use email to contact me: rockytopkg@aol.com.

Similar Threads

  1. Cass Sunstein
    By Eric Johnson in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-24-2009, 01:40 PM
  2. Florida courts sue Mozzillo
    By Richard Halstead in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-01-2009, 10:41 AM
  3. Leash law advice???
    By Gruntinbuck in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-02-2008, 05:23 AM
  4. dog law changes in ma.
    By Jim Person in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-11-2007, 10:14 AM
  5. MN Dpg Law
    By flywaylabs in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-15-2007, 10:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •