Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The Supreme Court will be made great again soon!
She complains about how unions will lose a "secure source" of revenue.
That is how you adjudicate a law ?
What a turd.
Had Vlad not saved the Republic by defeating St. Hillary the Inevitable, there would be 5 similar untethered by law gungrabbers who have have said on day 1 that there is no individual right to bear armsShe complains about how unions will lose a "secure source" of revenue.
That is how you adjudicate a law ?
What a turd.
OK, lets turn the argument. This claims that a president can go on record and say he will do something that's objectively unconstitutional . If he then does what he said he would do but gives a different constitutionally valid rationale in his EO. The courts can't take his previous statements in consideration but have to take the EO at face value? Does this apply to all confessions, or just the ones that POTUS does?
That's judicial activism...she is basing her legal opinions on how she feels about the subject and not on the legal argument before her...well the left is about to get a snoot full of their own medicine...not a good way for the courts to operate but they could have put an end to it so I will watch while they try to figure out how this happened to them.She complains about how unions will lose a "secure source" of revenue.
That is how you adjudicate a law ?
Consider the source, J.E.D.; he is very limited that way.Spell her name correctly, then get back to me about her lack of intelligence. DipshitShe complains about how unions will lose a "secure source" of revenue.
That is how you adjudicate a law ?
What a turd.
its time for Democrats to throw down. the GOP have been playin by street rules, it's time for Dems to man up and deny Trump's appointment to the Supreme Court.
don't hold a hearing, don't hold a vote. no hearing, no vote! NO HEARING, NO VOTE! NO SLEEP, NO PEACE!
She complains about how unions will lose a "secure source" of revenue.
That is how you adjudicate a law ?
What a turd.
How the fuck do they claim to be lawyers? Kagan got the gig because she covered for Obama and had Larry Tribe take the bar exam for him
Excerpt from the article:
'There is a difference between thinking something is a bad idea (and you could easily argue that the travel ban is a bad idea) and claiming it has no rational basis and is therefore void. The plaintiffs, the district court, the Ninth Circuit, and Sotomayor are committing a cardinal sin of jurisprudence: coming up with the answer they wish was true and working backward to invent a legal justification for it.
...Many of us found the president’s comments on Muslims to be wrong and hateful, and many of us find the travel ban to be the wrong way of improving our national security. But the theory advanced by the plaintiffs here would be of greater harm still to the rule of law and would create a system in which judges do not “say what the law is” but, rather, say what they think it ought to be. That is the beginning of the end for representative government. That four of nine justices cared more about their personal feelings than the rule of law is far more dangerous to this republic than anything President Trump has ever done.'
Comment: We have some biased doozies sitting on the Supreme Court - a court that is supposed to concentrate on the law without the influence of party loyalty. Kagan's statement about union's loss of revenue is shocking!...what about the individual's loss of revenue when forced to pay dues to a union in order to hold a job. Sotomayor should never have been seated on the Supreme Court and Bader-Ginsburg should recuse herself from any case involving the president as she has exhibited extreme bias toward him...or go ahead and move to New Zealand.
1. Sotomayor is on record stating that she judges by 'feelings and experiences'...and 'policy' is made by the court. Rather than what 'the law is'.?
2, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is being criticized for trash talking Donald Trump in a recent interview and vowing to move to New Zealand if he is elected to the White House.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg under fire over Donald Trump comments | Daily Mail Online
its time for Democrats to throw down. the GOP have been playin by street rules, it's time for Dems to man up and deny Trump's appointment to the Supreme Court.
don't hold a hearing, don't hold a vote. no hearing, no vote! NO HEARING, NO VOTE! NO SLEEP, NO PEACE!
Spell her name correctly, then get back to me about her lack of intelligence.She complains about how unions will lose a "secure source" of revenue.
That is how you adjudicate a law ?
What a turd.
Dipshit
