Conservatives face liberal 'firewall' on Supreme Court.

Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 years, 2 months ago to Legislation
28 comments | Share | Flag

The not so supreme court is even more powerful than obobo...easy fix...STOP PAYING THEM! like Jefferson did...they'll go away mad...but they'll go away.

“Congress needs to strip the courts of power to strike down immigration laws. What I don’t want is people to take this victory and say we should have the courts deciding immigration because it worked in our favor here. The political ramifications here are very narrow. It doesn’t force Obama to start deportations and it doesn’t strip affirmative benefits from others who have received amnesty.
SOURCE URL: http://www.wnd.com/2016/06/conservatives-face-liberal-firewall-on-supreme-court/#!


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  Flootus5 2 years, 2 months ago
    The Birchers have been proposing this stripping of the lower courts for quite some time. A bonafide strategy with constitutional authority.

    The weak link, as usual, is the voting public is largely ignorant of this authority vested in Congress and hence don't elect candidates with this direction in mind. Plus the libs would see it as threatening one of their favorite modes of transforming this country.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  2 years, 2 months ago
      They need to go back into the basement where they once did business for the constitution...ever since they've been above ground they have become underhanded.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Flootus5 2 years, 2 months ago
        Indeed. They just seem to get more brazen as they make headway. With the 2004 election and into 2005, I definitively concluded to myself that the American People had lost control of their government. With the the 2012 election I had to conclude that the looters and moochers now outnumber the producers.

        What will I have to conclude in November of 2016?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 2 years, 2 months ago
    The Constitution expressly spells out that the pay of judges, and of the President, cannot be changed during their terms of office. This was done precisely in order to prevent Congress from bullying the other branches and thus defeating the separation of powers.

    If courts are striking down immigration laws, then write those laws to comply with the Constitution. Or amend the Constitution to allow them.

    While we're at it, the Constitution should be amended to fix the size of the Supreme Court so nobody can "pack" it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 2 years, 2 months ago
    Ever since the Supreme Court has become politicized beyond rationality, their usefulness has dissipated to that of a news commentator. Their purpose, and their ONLY purpose is to interpret the Constitution as it applies to the matter at hand They have often strayed so far from this that it makes their decisions relevant only because they have the power to make, change, or destroy laws.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 2 years, 2 months ago
    Congress definitely needs to start wielding and defending its own power. Instead, they've authorized agencies under the Executive Branch to deal with most things. They have created and continue to perpetuate their own nemesis, despite having the tools with which to end their own slavery - power of the purse.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 2 years, 2 months ago
    Lincoln is to blame.
    The dictator and war criminal destroyed states rights and murdered 600,000 Americans in his unneeded, traitorous war against individual liberty.
    Prior to that time state governments ignored the politically appointed idiots on the supreme court as they should have. The court was never given power to decide constitutionality. They looted it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jabuttrick 2 years, 2 months ago
      And you want constitutionality to be decided by whom? Presidents, like Lincoln? Or Congress under FDR?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 2 years, 2 months ago
        By the states as it was done before the Marshall court (and later ones) took control of power they were never granted. I prefer states rights which allows possibility of more than one outcome so that there are competitive ideas tried instead of the feds dictating what makes them stronger while destroying liberty and free markets.
        The constitution says nothing about the power of the court to dictate constitutionality and the states once ignored the dictatorial "judgement" of those unelected lifetime bureaucrats.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by libertylad 2 years, 2 months ago
          This makes sense. The feds currently force communities to take immigrants that they do not want and can't assimilate. Sometimes this is another method to gerrymander districts. Recent headline example is Amarillo TX. State and local government are more responsive to their residents and should be able to make such decisions.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  2 years, 2 months ago
          Ok, but isn't the unsurpreme court there to decide challenges to the constitutionality of a states law?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by freedomforall 2 years, 2 months ago
            Not according to Judge Andrew Napolitano's book
            https://www.lewrockwell.com/2006/08/t...

            That power was stolen from the people by the court in the 19th century just like the power of jury nullification has been stolen by federal judges.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jdg 2 years, 2 months ago
              I have The Constitution In Exile and mostly agree with it. However, I believe the Supreme Court's power to rule laws unconstitutional is both authorized and necessary, even if the Court since the New Deal has been much too reluctant to use it.

              We should, however, take away from the Court its power to make nonsensical rulings about the meaning of important words and phrases, as (for instance) "interstate commerce" was reinterpreted in Wickard v. Filburn to include all kinds of behavior that are neither interstate nor commerce. But I don't know how we might either overturn that decision or purge the Court of people who agree with it, given that both Congress and the general public (if given recall power in the future) are unlikely to go along with changing it back.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by freedomforall 2 years, 2 months ago
                You want to give them the power, then you want to take it away when they disagree with your interpretation. (I would likely agree with you;^)
                Unfortunately, giving any feds the authority to interpret law is too much power. Its the same as expecting a federal judge to fairly decide a disagreement between the feds and an individual. Letting them judge when they are being challenged is naive. They have too much self interest in the outcome to judge fairly.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  2 years, 2 months ago
        Good Point.
        I thought of responding, but changed my mind, that NO ONE has the right to enslave another...do we not have the right and perhaps the responsibility to stand up to that?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo