Enforcement of Court Opinions

[pegwinn]

How do the courts enforce opinions? What would prevent the President from telling the Supreme Court to kiss his ass and direct the AG to have the FBI do something even if the USSC or Congress doesn't like it?

What is to prevent a State government from telling the USSC that "Thanks, but it's only your opinion, so we'll do it our way." ?

 

[dilloduck]

How do the courts enforce opinions? What would prevent the President from telling the Supreme Court to kiss his ass and direct the AG to have the FBI do something even if the USSC or Congress doesn't like it?

What is to prevent a State government from telling the USSC that "Thanks, but it's only your opinion, so we'll do it our way." ?

nothing other than voluntary obedience to the constitution

laws punish but don't protect

 

[pegwinn]

nothing other than voluntary obedience to the constitution

laws punish but don't protect

Thank you. So, declaring a state law against same sex sodomy to be unconstitutional is enenforceable? Texas could tell the USSC that "We like it our way" and there is nothing to be done?

 

[Annie]

How do the courts enforce opinions? What would prevent the President from telling the Supreme Court to kiss his ass and direct the AG to have the FBI do something even if the USSC or Congress doesn't like it?

What is to prevent a State government from telling the USSC that "Thanks, but it's only your opinion, so we'll do it our way." ?

The executive branch has the duty to execute the laws. They are the teeth. They can call out the national guard if a state tries non-compliance. IE Civil Rights.

 

[pegwinn]

The executive branch has the duty to execute the laws. They are the teeth. They can call out the national guard if a state tries non-compliance. IE Civil Rights.

Did you mean to say that the USSC has the authority to call out the NG? IF so, I must disagree. While I am not a legal scholar, I have a small amount of legal knowlege within the realm of military application.

If OTOH you meant that the executive is supposed to enforce the judiciary, I understand that. But what about if the executive cannot stomach the judiciary since they are becoming more activist all the time. Did or did not Gov Bush have the ability to order State Troopers into the hospice? I have read elsewhere that opinions are not enforceable upon any party. But I can't find it anywhere now.

 

[Annie]

Did you mean to say that the USSC has the authority to call out the NG? IF so, I must disagree. While I am not a legal scholar, I have a small amount of legal knowlege within the realm of military application.

If OTOH you meant that the executive is supposed to enforce the judiciary, I understand that. But what about if the executive cannot stomach the judiciary since they are becoming more activist all the time. Did or did not Gov Bush have the ability to order State Troopers into the hospice? I have read elsewhere that opinions are not enforceable upon any party. But I can't find it anywhere now.

No the President does, not the courts. I suppose GW could have called the NG out, but I would assume he'd be impeached for such an act.

 

[dilloduck]

No the President does, not the courts. I suppose GW could have called the NG out, but I would assume he'd be impeached for such an act.

That would depend on getting enough congressional votes tho but you know that.

How many "wars" have we been in now without Congress declaring them?

 

[MissileMan]

Did or did not Gov Bush have the ability to order State Troopers into the hospice?

Since there were no laws being broken, Gov Bush had no authority to send troopers into the hospice. I'm alarmed by the number of people who seem to want throw the law aside any time they are in disagreement with it. If you don't like a law, get it changed. If you can't get it changed, you have two choices; live with it or find yourself another country/state.

 

[Annie]

Since there were no laws being broken, Gov Bush had no authority to send troopers into the hospice. I'm alarmed by the number of people who seem to want throw the law aside any time they are in disagreement with it. If you don't like a law, get it changed. If you can't get it changed, you have two choices; live with it or find yourself another country/state.

Which is why I said I assumed he would have been impeached.

 

[MissileMan]

Which is why I said I assumed he would have been impeached.

Unless he got involved in a sex scandal and perjured himself in court...then they'd have to let him slide! :teeth:

 

[Annie]

Unless he got involved in a sex scandal and perjured himself in court...then they'd have to let him slide! :teeth:

LOL Laura doesn't look great in Old Navy dress. Actually, the 'people' would be madder than they were at FDR's Court packing scheme, which nearly got him in very hot water.

Wouldn't happen. Not even Jeb, much less GW, ever considered such action.

 

[pegwinn]

Since there were no laws being broken, Gov Bush had no authority to send troopers into the hospice. I'm alarmed by the number of people who seem to want throw the law aside any time they are in disagreement with it. If you don't like a law, get it changed. If you can't get it changed, you have two choices; live with it or find yourself another country/state.

Hey MM, Lighten up. I asked a question. I didn't forment rebellion. I am looking at three supposedly coequal branches of government. I see clear checks and balances on the executive. Less on the Legislative, and fewer still on the judiciary. Think of this as brainstorming. Not much rainfall in my head, that's why I posed a question.

 

[MissileMan]

Hey MM, Lighten up. I asked a question. I didn't forment rebellion. I am looking at three supposedly coequal branches of government. I see clear checks and balances on the executive. Less on the Legislative, and fewer still on the judiciary. Think of this as brainstorming. Not much rainfall in my head, that's why I posed a question.

Sentences 2-4 were not aimed necessarily at you unless you believe that Gov Bush should have said "to hell with the law" and sent in troopers anyways as some of the folks around here have advocated. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[pegwinn]

Which is why I said I assumed he would have been impeached.

But would he be. Is ignoring a USSC Opinion a high crime or misdemeanor? I need to revisit the FDR V. USSC battles. I seem to remember him telling the court to back down, or else. But I don't remember the details. Thanks. Hope your Monday went well.

 

[Annie]

But would he be. Is ignoring a USSC Opinion a high crime or misdemeanor? I need to revisit the FDR V. USSC battles. I seem to remember him telling the court to back down, or else. But I don't remember the details. Thanks. Hope your Monday went well.

Abusing his power would be. My Monday after Spring break, with temps near 70, went as well as could be expected.

 

[5stringJeff]

Moving to Politics... this is a government thread.

 

[wolverine]

I can't remember (perhaps there was) a loud cry for Clinton's head on a pole when federal agents grabbed little Gonzalez after a federal appeals court refused to order his surrender. Of course, I'm sure Clinton would have put all the blame on Reno for that.

 

['ol Perfessor]

Since there were no laws being broken, Gov Bush had no authority to send troopers into the hospice. I'm alarmed by the number of people who seem to want throw the law aside any time they are in disagreement with it. If you don't like a law, get it changed. If you can't get it changed, you have two choices; live with it or find yourself another country/state.

Federally there is due process, the law calling for de novo revue passed by both houses of congress, and the small matter of a congressional subpeona that was literally ignored. At the state level I have read, but have not substantiated a Florida law concerning the handicapped that guarentees protection from abuse, state constitutuional due process, and questions of guardianship that were ignored. The guv coulda, the prez coulda, but both are afraid of the judiciary more than they fear God. We didn't see Clinton shrink from ignoring the courts.

 

[Avatar4321]

[QUOTE='ol Perfessor]Federally there is due process, the law calling for de novo revue passed by both houses of congress, and the small matter of a congressional subpeona that was literally ignored. At the state level I have read, but have not substantiated a Florida law concerning the handicapped that guarentees protection from abuse, state constitutuional due process, and questions of guardianship that were ignored. The guv coulda, the prez coulda, but both are afraid of the judiciary more than they fear God. We didn't see Clinton shrink from ignoring the courts.[/QUOTE]

I don't think its the courts they are worried about. I think its the media. Clinton could get away with it because a)the courts are liberal b) the media would have spun it anyway they could to excuse any of his actions anyway. I dont think the President or Governor Bush have that luxary.

 

['ol Perfessor]

Hey MM, Lighten up. I asked a question. I didn't forment rebellion. I am looking at three supposedly coequal branches of government. I see clear checks and balances on the executive. Less on the Legislative, and fewer still on the judiciary. Think of this as brainstorming. Not much rainfall in my head, that's why I posed a question.

The house has voted at least once to limit the courts jurisdiction in a case in the last year. The good'ol boys in the senate seem to have not jumped on this bandwagon. I sense though that even our underinformed and basically stupid on constitutional issues general electorate is sensing that they have been had: and that the legislature has abdicated their lawmaking to a group that is virtually untouchable. There is no logic for European opinion, anti God's teachings "rulings" unless the doctrinaire of the courts is to change quickly what kept the socialist agenda from succeeding in Europe......God and therefore independence from the state. I still recall being awed by the courage shown by the people lining the streets to see John Paul after fifty years of brutal repression of God in the Iron Curtain countries. May we now show the same!