In Historic 6-3 Supreme Court Decision, 3 Justices Ruled To Be Morons

[Crepitus]

His hidden plan all along!

It is true that he doesn't seem to like them much.

Except for Ivanka, if you know what I mean.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Don't be stupider than you have to be, kid.

I strongly advise you not to speak from experience.

 

[TemplarKormac]

I will continue to fight for my country.

You anti American fascist types should leave immediately though.

Fighting for his country, one keystroke at a time.

 

[Rogue AI]

That's nice, kid, but not really what's being discussed here.

Wanna try again?

All you've done is whine, where is the discussion in that?

 

[WelfareQueen]

The courts can overturn an executive order, as it is perfectly possible for an EO to exceed the authority of the President.

The courts can overturn an executive order, as it is perfectly possible for an EO to exceed the authority of the President.

I did not say overturn. Read more carefully. I said Nullify, which is a legal term. No court can nullify any Law or Executive Order. A Court can deem any Law or Executive Order to be, as the Founders said Repugnant to the Constitution. The remedy would then be to have the Congress rewrite or modify the Law, or the President to rewrite or amend his Executive Order.

But this District Court Judges were attempting in nullify the Executive orders in my opinion. They do not have the authority to do so as the Supreme Court ruled.

 

[Meathead]

I will continue to fight for my country.

You anti American fascist types should leave immediately though.

Look left idiot.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Great day for America.

REALLY bad day for Marxism and those who hate America. And the Ultra corrupt.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I did not say overturn. Read more carefully. I said Nullify, which is a legal term.

Within the context of a judicial proceeding to determine the constitutionality of an executive order, demonstrate the difference between "overturn" and "nullify".

 

[TemplarKormac]

Within the context of a judicial proceeding to determine the constitutionality of an executive order, demonstrate the difference between "overturn" and "nullify".

From my perspective, in a legal context, both mean "to render inert, to prevent the function of. To reverse."

But overturn can have a dual meaning of either allowing or preventing.

 

[toobfreak]

Let the bitchslapping begin!

And as usual, leftists nowhere to be found, once again taking a pounding to the face. About TEN major decisions today, several of them HISTORY-CHANGING, and all of them to the detriment of the Left. Best of all, in her opinion: Justice Amy Comey Barrett basically excoriated and chewed justice Jackson a new ass.

 

[M14 Shooter]

From my perspective, in a legal context, both mean "to render inert, to prevent the function of. To reverse.

The courts, absolutely, have the power to overturn, or nullify, an EO.

 

[Synthaholic]

Lol!

 

[Synthaholic]

Lol!

Trump and allies celebrated court orders against Biden they now claim are ‘tyrannical’​

 

[TemplarKormac]

Lol!

From 2021?

You must be desperate.

 

[toobfreak]

The courts, absolutely, have the power to overturn, or nullify, an EO.

That would mean that the Executive Branch serves at the pleasure of 670 judges, which is unconstitutional.

If true, no president could pass any order unless both the SCOTUS and 670 other courts all agreed with the action. That would make the Judicial Branch effectively an Oligarchy under which both the President and Congress served.

 

[M14 Shooter]

That would mean ....

There's no debate here -- the court has been reviewing and overturning executive orders for >200 years.

Judicial Review of Executive Orders | Federal Judicial Center

Includes landmark legislation, congressional committees, appropriations, administrative agencies, court officers and staff…

www.fjc.gov

The courts, absolutely, have the power to overturn, or nullify, an EO.

 

[toobfreak]

There's no debate here -- the court has been reviewing and overturning executive orders for >200 years.
The courts, absolutely, have the power to overturn, or nullify, an EO.

If you mean the Supreme Court, which is a co-equal power to the president. Not just some bum in a district court in Colorado.

 

[WEATHER53]

In a 6-3 ruling, the SCOTUS has granted a partial stay against lower courts that issue nationwide injunctions. Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the Majority. This is a huge victory for the Trump administration, freeing it to essentially enact its agenda as it sees fit within the bounds of constitutional law. It mostly stops lower courts from issuing blanket injunctions.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a884_8n59.pdf

All the monkey business interference by 1.5% of the judiciary is coming to a halt
Law and thought ruling and violent emotions being set aside. One pitiful state can still purse its America last policy but the handwriting is on the wall

 

[M14 Shooter]

If you mean the Supreme Court, which is a co-equal power to the president. Not just some bum in a district court in Colorado.

The SC is the final arbiter - thus, the court.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Fascism is no longer creeping in, it just arrived.

Oh Bull. You have to know your side will use this decision as well as conservatives do. District courts don't have authority outside their districts. It's only logical, otherwise there oud be no district courts, just national ones.