The supreme court

[ecinicola]

I am applaud at the president interferring with the supreme court on the obamacare issue. It is not the presidents job to interfer in the laws of the court. The supreme court judges should be insulted by the actions of obama trying to intimidate their decisions.
The obamacare is unconstitutional and i hope the judges are not swayed by the rethoric of this muslim we have in the white house. I pray for all our sakes the laws of the constitution will be upheld and obamacare thrown out. If this court doesn't do what is right, then our livelyhoods are finished. Of course you have two judges on the panel that are obama appointees and they will vote in obama's favor for personal reasons and not by what the laws are. Time will tell what happens and i pray they over turn obamacare.

 

[Sallow]

Spell check is your friend.

As is the dictionary. Pick up a paper every once in a while that doesn't come from the Murdoch propaganda machine.

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. Ol' EC has been told that many times in many other places. But it just doesn't seem to sink in.

 

[ecinicola]

I'm sure you understood my post, or weren't you able to comprehend it.?

 

[Dutch]

I am applaud at the president interferring with the supreme court on the obamacare issue. It is not the presidents job to interfer in the laws of the court. The supreme court judges should be insulted by the actions of obama trying to intimidate their decisions.
The obamacare is unconstitutional and i hope the judges are not swayed by the rethoric of this muslim we have in the white house. I pray for all our sakes the laws of the constitution will be upheld and obamacare thrown out. If this court doesn't do what is right, then our livelyhoods are finished. Of course you have two judges on the panel that are obama appointees and they will vote in obama's favor for personal reasons and not by what the laws are. Time will tell what happens and i pray they over turn obamacare.

I am "applaud" that you do not know that both sides do this. If a decision does not go their way Conservatives or Progressives will scream "judicial activism".
If you believe the "rethoric" that Obama is a Muslim, you are beyond gone and no amount of arguing will persuade you.

 

[L.K.Eder]

i am macleod.

 

[VaYank5150]

Spell check is your friend.

As is the dictionary. Pick up a paper every once in a while that doesn't come from the Murdoch propaganda machine.

Based on that junkyard of our alphabet in his/her post, no it obviously isn't.....

 

[waltky]

Granny hopes dem lib'ral, activist judges don't side with the terrorists...

Supreme Court considers taking up anti-terror laws
May 21, 2012 WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court, after a four-year break from terrorism issues, is set to decide as soon as today whether to again take up constitutional challenges to anti-terrorism laws involving wiretapping and the Guantanamo prisoners.

In one case, the Obama administration is asking the court to block a suit against the government's monitoring of international phone calls and emails. And in the other set of appeals, lawyers for six detainees at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are asking the justices to make good on their promise of four years ago and give the inmates a "meaningful opportunity" to go free. If not, the right to appeal given to the detainees in 2008 "will be a virtual dead letter," said Jonathan Hafetz, a law professor at Seton Hall University in New Jersey.

President George W. Bush maintained that the detainees were military prisoners who had no rights under American civilian law. The Supreme Court disagreed and held that the Constitution's right to habeas corpus extended to the hundreds of Guantanamo prisoners. They have a right to a "meaningful review" of their cases by a federal judge, said Justice Anthony Kennedy. Since then, no detainee has gone free based just on a court order. The Obama administration has agreed to send home dozens of detainees who were seen as no longer a danger. But whenever the administration has opposed a detainee's claim, it has won in the conservative-leaning U.S. court of appeals in Washington.

The justices, however, are more likely to hear the administration's appeal in the wiretapping case, Clapper v. Amnesty International. It poses the question of whether journalists, lawyers and human rights activists have standing to challenge wiretapping of suspects overseas because their private communications may be intercepted. In the last months of the Bush administration, Congress confirmed the government's broad power to monitor international phone calls and emails in an effort to detect terrorist plots. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 2008 allows extended electronic surveillance "targeting" non-Americans believed to be outside the United States and who raised the suspicions of U.S. intelligence officials.

The American Civil Liberties Union sued and said this "dragnet surveillance" would likely capture the private calls and emails of thousands of Americans who are not targets but who have contact with people abroad. They said this secret surveillance violates the Fourth Amendment's ban on unreasonable searches.

Source

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Spell check is your friend.

As is the dictionary. Pick up a paper every once in a while that doesn't come from the Murdoch propaganda machine.

When was the last time you told TM to use spell check? Just curious.

 

[MuadDib]

Baba?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Spell check is your friend.

As is the dictionary. Pick up a paper every once in a while that doesn't come from the Murdoch propaganda machine.

When was the last time you told TM to use spell check? Just curious.

MajorFuckingDeflection

 

[Claudette]

After the way Barry insulted the SC at the SOTU address I doubt any of the SC Judges will be paying any heed to what the ONE has to say regarding anything.

I know I'd tell him to fuck off.

 

[Contumacious]

I am applaud at the president interferring with the supreme court on the obamacare issue. It is not the presidents job to interfer in the laws of the court. The supreme court judges should be insulted by the actions of obama trying to intimidate their decisions.

The precedent is there. A white dude named FDR threatened to abolish the SCOTUS , circa 1935. The SCOTUS caved in an approved all of FDR's fascist policies.


.