Elena Kagan Passes the Senate

[Harry Dresden]

yeah, someone totally and wholly unqualified to sit on the bench was confirmed.

so Jill....what is your thoughts on this?.....

 

[Leweman]

Judges should be elected and/or have term limits ... time for an amendment.

HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dont fuck with the system
you think its bad now, get politics more involved in the judiciary

agreed...with that said....i like cali's system of both appointed and elected at the lower court levels....balances the system the out....but not at the scotus level, no way, no how....i know cali votes theirs in for 12, however, making state sct decisions is vastly different that scotus decisions

I don't see how it could be more political. Judges can be up there representing the political climate from 40 years ago because of lifetime appointments even though the political climate of America at the time is the complete opposite. Thats not right at all. At least not in my opinion. 9 people get to determine right and wrong? Makes no sense to me.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Guess having old white men that believe in the Constitution isn't fashionable for a Supreme Court Judge anymore.

 

[DiveCon]

HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dont fuck with the system
you think its bad now, get politics more involved in the judiciary

agreed...with that said....i like cali's system of both appointed and elected at the lower court levels....balances the system the out....but not at the scotus level, no way, no how....i know cali votes theirs in for 12, however, making state sct decisions is vastly different that scotus decisions

I don't see how it could be more political. Judges can be up there representing the political climate from 40 years ago because of lifetime appointments even though the political climate of America at the time is the complete opposite. Thats not right at all. At least not in my opinion. 9 people get to determine right and wrong? Makes no sense to me.

because it tends to give more stability to the courts
and a judge can be removed
there is a process

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Judges should be elected and/or have term limits ... time for an amendment.

HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dont fuck with the system
you think its bad now, get politics more involved in the judiciary

Have you paid attention to current events? You think the judiciary is free of politics?

 

[Leweman]

agreed...with that said....i like cali's system of both appointed and elected at the lower court levels....balances the system the out....but not at the scotus level, no way, no how....i know cali votes theirs in for 12, however, making state sct decisions is vastly different that scotus decisions

I don't see how it could be more political. Judges can be up there representing the political climate from 40 years ago because of lifetime appointments even though the political climate of America at the time is the complete opposite. Thats not right at all. At least not in my opinion. 9 people get to determine right and wrong? Makes no sense to me.

because it tends to give more stability to the courts
and a judge can be removed
there is a process

I dunno. It seems more than not that the judges create law based on ideaolgy as opposed to reality. If something needs changed in the constitution we can change it as a country thru amendments. Other than that I dont think the constitution is as ambiguous as a lot of judges make it seem. Heck the right to bear arms was decided on 5-4 decision wasnt it? That should have been unanimous no ifs and or buts about it. But I'm not lawyer or constitution expert so Im sure a lot of people no more about this stuff in detail than I do but thats just my opinion.

 

[DiveCon]

Judges should be elected and/or have term limits ... time for an amendment.

HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dont fuck with the system
you think its bad now, get politics more involved in the judiciary

Have you paid attention to current events? You think the judiciary is free of politics?

just for you, frank

 

[goldcatt]

I don't see how it could be more political. Judges can be up there representing the political climate from 40 years ago because of lifetime appointments even though the political climate of America at the time is the complete opposite. Thats not right at all. At least not in my opinion. 9 people get to determine right and wrong? Makes no sense to me.

because it tends to give more stability to the courts
and a judge can be removed
there is a process

I dunno. It seems more than not that the judges create law based on ideaolgy as opposed to reality. If something needs changed in the constitution we can change it as a country thru amendments. Other than that I dont think the constitution is as ambiguous as a lot of judges make it seem. Heck the right to bear arms was decided on 5-4 decision wasnt it? That should have been unanimous no ifs and or buts about it. But I'm not lawyer or constitution expert so Im sure a lot of people no more about this stuff in detail than I do but thats just my opinion.

Of course the Justices are political, but SCOTUS politics aren't like Congress'. They may (do) decide cases based in part or whole on ideology, but they're not doing it to butter up donors and get votes for re-election.

That's the difference. An ideologue is bad enough, but unless they're way off the deep end they can still be intellectually honest. A whore? Not so much.

 

[DiveCon]

because it tends to give more stability to the courts
and a judge can be removed
there is a process

I dunno. It seems more than not that the judges create law based on ideaolgy as opposed to reality. If something needs changed in the constitution we can change it as a country thru amendments. Other than that I dont think the constitution is as ambiguous as a lot of judges make it seem. Heck the right to bear arms was decided on 5-4 decision wasnt it? That should have been unanimous no ifs and or buts about it. But I'm not lawyer or constitution expert so Im sure a lot of people no more about this stuff in detail than I do but thats just my opinion.

Of course the Justices are political, but SCOTUS politics aren't like Congress'. They may (do) decide cases based in part or whole on ideology, but they're not doing it to butter up donors and get votes for re-election.

That's the difference. An ideologue is bad enough, but unless they're way off the deep end they can still be intellectually honest. A whore? Not so much.

and those way off the deep end usually have a rough time in confirmation

 

[UriahH]

She'll irritate the other Supremes with her insanely matter of fact rejoinders and lack of humor.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I dunno. It seems more than not that the judges create law based on ideaolgy as opposed to reality. If something needs changed in the constitution we can change it as a country thru amendments. Other than that I dont think the constitution is as ambiguous as a lot of judges make it seem. Heck the right to bear arms was decided on 5-4 decision wasnt it? That should have been unanimous no ifs and or buts about it. But I'm not lawyer or constitution expert so Im sure a lot of people no more about this stuff in detail than I do but thats just my opinion.

Of course the Justices are political, but SCOTUS politics aren't like Congress'. They may (do) decide cases based in part or whole on ideology, but they're not doing it to butter up donors and get votes for re-election.

That's the difference. An ideologue is bad enough, but unless they're way off the deep end they can still be intellectually honest. A whore? Not so much.

and those way off the deep end usually have a rough time in confirmation

Also, if we elected Justices, they'd spend all their time worrying about re-election, like other politicians. It takes money to win an election, and it takes corruption to make money.

 

[Zona]

She'll irritate the other Supremes with her insanely matter of fact rejoinders and lack of humor.

Then I agree, she should not be there. I mean Alito is a crack up!

 

[Leweman]

Of course the Justices are political, but SCOTUS politics aren't like Congress'. They may (do) decide cases based in part or whole on ideology, but they're not doing it to butter up donors and get votes for re-election.

That's the difference. An ideologue is bad enough, but unless they're way off the deep end they can still be intellectually honest. A whore? Not so much.

and those way off the deep end usually have a rough time in confirmation

Also, if we elected Justices, they'd spend all their time worrying about re-election, like other politicians. It takes money to win an election, and it takes corruption to make money.

Still, although not corrupt, I think they still are beholden to their ideologies and the people that put them there as much as any politician. Maybe not though.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

and those way off the deep end usually have a rough time in confirmation

Also, if we elected Justices, they'd spend all their time worrying about re-election, like other politicians. It takes money to win an election, and it takes corruption to make money.

Still, although not corrupt, I think they still are beholden to their ideologies and the people that put them there as much as any politician. Maybe not though.

Ideology is how the get selected. But they don't have to cow to special interests, since the Court is a lifetime appointment.

I'd rather have an ideological court than a corrupt one.

Just like I'd rather a corrupt legislative than an ideological one.

 

[Political Junky]

She'll irritate the other Supremes with her insanely matter of fact rejoinders and lack of humor.

Then I agree, she should not be there. I mean Alito is a crack up!

Surely his sense of humor is what guaranteed Alito's appointment and confirmation to the Court.

 

[MarcATL]

Dear God, what a sad day.

Yeah....how shocking to hear that....you know, with "conservatives'" tendency to start blubbering, when they don't go-their-way.....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxDgRr_Ynvc]YouTube - ‪Right America Feeling Wronged pt1‬‎[/ame]​

Interesting seeing the people of Western PA saying that they, not city people, are the backbone of America. No doubt, those same people back BP [corporations] over the people of the Gulf Coast.

Interesting how that works huh?

 

[cad]

Guess having old white men that believe in the Constitution isn't fashionable for a Supreme Court Judge anymore.

we need more wise latinas

 

[MarcATL]

Actually...we really DO need more wise latinas.

vs. more dumb old white men.

 

[cad]

Actually...we really DO need more wise latinas.

vs. more dumb old white men.

yeah, alito and roberts. dumb old fucking white men.

 

[MarcATL]

I didn't call those fellers dum dums...YOU did.

ROTFLMBAO!!!!!!!