Constitutional Literacy NOT a Requirement for SCOTUS

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Kurtis Bottke, Apr 24, 2010.

  1. Kurtis Bottke
    Offline

    Kurtis Bottke Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +0
    [/Am I the only one who is appalled that there are NO Constitutional scholars on the Supreme Court? It's frightening to think that on a body whose sole purpose is interpreting the Constitution and Bill of Rights, there's probably no one whose even read the Federalist Papers, the very arguments that our Constitution is based on. It's because the Supreme Court cannot be counted on to overturn unconstitutional laws that people like the Liberty Candidates (gigibowman.wordpress.com) are needed to ensure such laws are not passed to begin with, and to try and overturn those that have already been passed. If the Federalist Papers and the Constitution are used as a guide 3/4 of what the federal government does is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, political correctness, not Constitutional knowledge are more important in selecting a nominee. Both the right and left are guilty of this. Neither side wants to risk having someone knowledgeable about the Constitution and Bill of Rights overturning their pet laws and regulations. This is why we must be careful not to elect more establishment hacks to Congress, but strict Constitutionalists. Liberty Candidates are such people. We need a REAL revolution of ideas in November, not the same old Progressive ideology that has been destroying world economies for over a century. COLOR]
     
  2. Vanquish
    Offline

    Vanquish Vanquisher of shills

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,659
    Thanks Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +358
    Don't tell Sarah Palin that you want a constitutional scholar....we elected one president and she tears him down for it.

    That being said, I agree with your main sentiment. The judicial activism has run amok. We need textualists or originalists as SC candidates, plain and simple.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,555
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,432
    there isn't any such thing as 'originalism except as a political construct'.... there weren't even on the 'original' USSC.
     
  4. rightwinger
    Offline

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,375
    Thanks Received:
    19,846
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,413
    Call for fundamentalist Constitutionists.

    Lets get someone who reads the Constitution like the Bible and assumes the founding fathers were Gods
     
  5. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,548
    Thanks Received:
    8,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,163
    Haha. Yeah. Obama is a Constitutional Scholar. Right.
     
  6. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397


    The Federalist Papers? Why would you use them as an authority?
     
  7. SFC Ollie
    Offline

    SFC Ollie Still Marching

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Messages:
    28,742
    Thanks Received:
    4,418
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Extreme East Ohio
    Ratings:
    +4,458
    Fact is that there is actually no requirement for a Supreme court justice to even be a Lawyer. All it really takes is common sense. the Constitution is not that difficult to read and understand, we have made it difficult over the years. With things like a 2500 page health care bill that isn't about health care. We just can't seem to learn.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. Vanquish
    Offline

    Vanquish Vanquisher of shills

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,659
    Thanks Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +358
    You realize he taught Con Law, right? That makes your comment pretty much ridiculous.
     
  9. Vanquish
    Offline

    Vanquish Vanquisher of shills

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,659
    Thanks Received:
    354
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +358
    You're wrong.

    To be a judge you're required to have been a lawyer.

    To be on the SCOTUS you're required to have been a lawyer.

    Wrong on all counts. I know you're going with the whole, it's not in the constitution thing...but yeah, there are requirements that are legal, but not in the constitution.

    Hate to break it to ya.
     
  10. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,555
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,432
    haha... yeah. he taught constitutional law at one of the better law schools in the country.

    but feel free to compare palin and her 'pro america parts of the country' to him.

    you betcha!
     

Share This Page