The first liberal court in two generations if HRC wins

[flacaltenn]

Wrong. When one prefers government to enforce morality and thought, one cannot be liberal.

Government enforcing morality is not liberal?

Which world do you live in?

No, it is not classically liberal. Classic Liberalism encourages freedom of expression and thought. Modern progressive Statism (under the cover of the word liberal) does not.

Classical liberalism is a political ideology and a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties and political freedom with representative democracy under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom.[1][2]

Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No such thing as "Classical Liberalism"

The liberalism of our founders existed in the views and morals of the day.....nothing "classical" about it

They supported slavery, opposed the equal rights of women yet were still the greatest "liberals" of their day

There are still "classic" liberals that love the Constitution and have a innate distrust of power in govt. Don't mind the fixes to the Constitution DONE LEGALLY. They are called Libertarians. True story..

Ignorant and wrong.

Liberals love, respect, and follow the Constitution and its case law – indeed, liberals correctly understand that the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.

The problem is conservatives and libertarians who are ignorant of, or have contempt for, the Constitution’s case law.

Case law reverses and refines with time. There is nothing sacrosanct about 5 to 4 decisions of a court hung one way or the other. That's what you're FIGHTING about in the thread.

When it comes to the items like turning the World's Premiere spy agency against it's OWN CITIZENS ---- you leftists are mute. Make political hay over "terrorist lists" and "drone kill lists" rather than FIXING THEM.

Leftists are often lately on the WRONG SIDE of even their own ACLU...

But most importantly -- you are not liberal because all the self-preservation instinct of REAL LIBERALS has been bred and taught right the fuck out of you when it comes to that innate distrust of govt power. No Thoreau -s anymore on the Left. You EMBRACE and LUST for power. And abuse it instinctively. It's what leftist politics has become all about.

No humility. No limits to the power you will TAKE -- if you can place the CORRECT people in the right offices.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

End of the death penalty (possibly)

End of Citizens United (a Clinton court will overturn it)

Rollback of Heller (don't think so)

Protection of abortion rights (they will continue to be protected against the attacks of the socons)

Protection of gay rights (they will continue to be protected against the attacks of the socons)

Spot on.

Particularly with regard to Heller/McDonald.

This illustrates that liberal jurists respect the Constitution and its case law, respect the rule of law, and follow settled, accepted Constitutional jurisprudence which is beyond dispute:

The right to privacy with regard to reproductive liberty.

The right to equal protection of the law for gay and transgender Americans.

The right to due process of the law for immigrants.

First Amendment protection of religious liberty – Muslim Americans in particular given the unwarranted fear and hostility directed toward Muslims by many on the right.

The right of minorities to vote.

And the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment concerning the individual right to possess a firearm and the right to lawful self-defense.

Indeed, liberals consider current Second Amendment jurisprudence to be as settled, accepted, and beyond dispute as privacy rights jurisprudence and 14th Amendment protections for those gay and transgender.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jones is telling you crazy gun freaks on the far right: hillary won't come to your door and take your guns.

 

[rightwinger]

Government enforcing morality is not liberal?

Which world do you live in?

No, it is not classically liberal. Classic Liberalism encourages freedom of expression and thought. Modern progressive Statism (under the cover of the word liberal) does not.

Classical liberalism is a political ideology and a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties and political freedom with representative democracy under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom.[1][2]

Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No such thing as "Classical Liberalism"

The liberalism of our founders existed in the views and morals of the day.....nothing "classical" about it

They supported slavery, opposed the equal rights of women yet were still the greatest "liberals" of their day

There are still "classic" liberals that love the Constitution and have a innate distrust of power in govt. Don't mind the fixes to the Constitution DONE LEGALLY. They are called Libertarians. True story..

All liberals love the Constitution.....we wrote it

Except for the 2nd, 5th, 10th amendments and all the POWERS that progressives IMAGINE are in the Constitution, when they are not. Nothing LEFT in the Dem party but folks who love themselves an omnipotent govt that can DICTATE every little flush on a toilet. Or the lights you switch on. Or the Big Gulp that you drink.

You leftists hunted your libertarians (the Blue Dogs) to extinction. Because they EMBARASSED you with dissent on spending and national security. Pretty much PURGED yourselves of anything truly "Liberal" in your party..

We wrote the constitution.
Libertarians are a nonentity. They talk the talk but never accomplish anything
Their...I got mine, fuck everyone else gets tiresome

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, it is not classically liberal. Classic Liberalism encourages freedom of expression and thought. Modern progressive Statism (under the cover of the word liberal) does not.

Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No such thing as "Classical Liberalism"

The liberalism of our founders existed in the views and morals of the day.....nothing "classical" about it

They supported slavery, opposed the equal rights of women yet were still the greatest "liberals" of their day

There are still "classic" liberals that love the Constitution and have a innate distrust of power in govt. Don't mind the fixes to the Constitution DONE LEGALLY. They are called Libertarians. True story..

All liberals love the Constitution.....we wrote it

Except for the 2nd, 5th, 10th amendments and all the POWERS that progressives IMAGINE are in the Constitution, when they are not. Nothing LEFT in the Dem party but folks who love themselves an omnipotent govt that can DICTATE every little flush on a toilet. Or the lights you switch on. Or the Big Gulp that you drink.

You leftists hunted your libertarians (the Blue Dogs) to extinction. Because they EMBARASSED you with dissent on spending and national security. Pretty much PURGED yourselves of anything truly "Liberal" in your party..

We wrote the constitution.
Libertarians are a nonentity. They talk the talk but never accomplish anything
Their...I got mine, fuck everyone else gets tiresome

Libertarians, generally, are laughable. It is "get of my lawn." They can't even agree on what is "libertarianism."

 

[flacaltenn]

No, it is not classically liberal. Classic Liberalism encourages freedom of expression and thought. Modern progressive Statism (under the cover of the word liberal) does not.

Classical liberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No such thing as "Classical Liberalism"

The liberalism of our founders existed in the views and morals of the day.....nothing "classical" about it

They supported slavery, opposed the equal rights of women yet were still the greatest "liberals" of their day

There are still "classic" liberals that love the Constitution and have a innate distrust of power in govt. Don't mind the fixes to the Constitution DONE LEGALLY. They are called Libertarians. True story..

All liberals love the Constitution.....we wrote it

Except for the 2nd, 5th, 10th amendments and all the POWERS that progressives IMAGINE are in the Constitution, when they are not. Nothing LEFT in the Dem party but folks who love themselves an omnipotent govt that can DICTATE every little flush on a toilet. Or the lights you switch on. Or the Big Gulp that you drink.

You leftists hunted your libertarians (the Blue Dogs) to extinction. Because they EMBARASSED you with dissent on spending and national security. Pretty much PURGED yourselves of anything truly "Liberal" in your party..

We wrote the constitution.
Libertarians are a nonentity. They talk the talk but never accomplish anything
Their...I got mine, fuck everyone else gets tiresome

Liberals wrote the Constitution -- you PURGED all of them. It's all about concentrating power to you today..
If anything, the Libertarian concepts of returning the freedoms and choices that you want to take away make us far in touch with the intentions of the Founders than any present/future "democrat" will ever be. Your idea of liberalism today is nothing more than robbing the rich to redistribute to the poor. And keeping the poor as a domesticated herd that you can depend on for votes.

To you --- packing the Court with ideologues to expand your power and control is a NOBLE thing. A Libertarian choice would simply be vetted -- not by trigger issues -- but by a fundamental interpretation of the document.

 

[flacaltenn]

No such thing as "Classical Liberalism"

The liberalism of our founders existed in the views and morals of the day.....nothing "classical" about it

They supported slavery, opposed the equal rights of women yet were still the greatest "liberals" of their day

There are still "classic" liberals that love the Constitution and have a innate distrust of power in govt. Don't mind the fixes to the Constitution DONE LEGALLY. They are called Libertarians. True story..

All liberals love the Constitution.....we wrote it

Except for the 2nd, 5th, 10th amendments and all the POWERS that progressives IMAGINE are in the Constitution, when they are not. Nothing LEFT in the Dem party but folks who love themselves an omnipotent govt that can DICTATE every little flush on a toilet. Or the lights you switch on. Or the Big Gulp that you drink.

You leftists hunted your libertarians (the Blue Dogs) to extinction. Because they EMBARASSED you with dissent on spending and national security. Pretty much PURGED yourselves of anything truly "Liberal" in your party..

We wrote the constitution.
Libertarians are a nonentity. They talk the talk but never accomplish anything
Their...I got mine, fuck everyone else gets tiresome

Libertarians, generally, are laughable. It is "get of my lawn." They can't even agree on what is "libertarianism."

Libertarians agree on the important stuff that your heroes have legally screwed. As I just said -- we ALL agree that the Patriot Act and that gi-normous palace that YOUR GUYS built for the NSA in Utah --- has to go. We said that BEFORE there was a Patriot Act or a massive new spy palace to spy on what you're gonna type next.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The quickest route to regulation of our rights is the unreasonable exercise thereof.

So the old "the peasants can't be trusted" line. Really?

No, rights come with responsibilities. Irresponsible behavior creates limitations. It's entirely up to us how limited the exercise of our rights become.

The whole idea of a right is they can only be limited in the most dire circumstances, like banning people from yelling FIRE in a crowded theater.

Some idiot using a gun illegally does not mean making it impossible for me to get one is acceptable.

That's right, which is why that doesn't happen.

Which is an entirely different discussion.

Actually its the same discussion. The question is when can government stomp on an enumerated right.

And the Constitution’s case law is used to answer that question.

Although the rights and protected liberties enshrined in the Bill of Rights are inalienable, they are not absolute – they are subject to reasonable restrictions by government consistent with relevant case law.

For example, hate speech is entitled to First Amendment protections; but advocating for imminent violence or lawlessness against a given race or religion through speech is not.

With regard to government regulatory authority, Commerce Clause jurisprudence determines when regulatory measures are necessary, proper, and Constitutional, and when they are not.

After more than 200 years of judicial review, there exists sufficient Constitutional jurisprudence to allow judges and justices to determine when government has acted in accordance with the Constitution, and when government has failed to abide by the Constitution’s case law.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The twin engines of history are (1) the refinement and development of energy and (2) the centralization of human activities.

Until we suffer an apocalyptic event, gang, that devolves our societies, (1) and (2) are not going to stop.

 

[flacaltenn]

Name me a couple "Liberal" authors and leaders of "modern Liberalism" that GUIDE your lefty party today.

Anyone????

Liberals ... Pffft..........

 

[rightwinger]

No such thing as "Classical Liberalism"

The liberalism of our founders existed in the views and morals of the day.....nothing "classical" about it

They supported slavery, opposed the equal rights of women yet were still the greatest "liberals" of their day

There are still "classic" liberals that love the Constitution and have a innate distrust of power in govt. Don't mind the fixes to the Constitution DONE LEGALLY. They are called Libertarians. True story..

All liberals love the Constitution.....we wrote it

Except for the 2nd, 5th, 10th amendments and all the POWERS that progressives IMAGINE are in the Constitution, when they are not. Nothing LEFT in the Dem party but folks who love themselves an omnipotent govt that can DICTATE every little flush on a toilet. Or the lights you switch on. Or the Big Gulp that you drink.

You leftists hunted your libertarians (the Blue Dogs) to extinction. Because they EMBARASSED you with dissent on spending and national security. Pretty much PURGED yourselves of anything truly "Liberal" in your party..

We wrote the constitution.
Libertarians are a nonentity. They talk the talk but never accomplish anything
Their...I got mine, fuck everyone else gets tiresome

Liberals wrote the Constitution -- you PURGED all of them. It's all about concentrating power to you today..
If anything, the Libertarian concepts of returning the freedoms and choices that you want to take away make us far in touch with the intentions of the Founders than any present/future "democrat" will ever be. Your idea of liberalism today is nothing more than robbing the rich to redistribute to the poor. And keeping the poor as a domesticated herd that you can depend on for votes.

To you --- packing the Court with ideologues to expand your power and control is a NOBLE thing. A Libertarian choice would simply be vetted -- not by trigger issues -- but by a fundamental interpretation of the document.

Libertarians don't actually do anything.....but they do post a lot on the Internet

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Scalia Conservative Empty Seat

Kennedy, Anthony Conservative 80 years old (will retire while Hillary is President)

Thomas, Clarence Conservative 68 years ( may retire due to dissatisfaction with a liberal court)

Roberts, John G. Conservative 61 yrs old ( will stay as Chief Justice)

Alito, Samuel Conservative 66 years old (will stay)


Ginsburg, Ruth Liberal 83 years old (will retire under Hillary)

Breyer, Stephen Liberal 78 years old (will retire)

Sotomayor, Sonia Liberal 62 years old (will stay)

Kagan, Elena Liberal 56 years old (will stay)


So Hillary will get to replace 2 liberal and 2 conservative seats (3 if Thomas drops out) giving Liberals a 6-3 edge for the next 25 years or more

The far right, who so wrongly think they are mainstream, have brought this on America because they wanted beyond all reason a candidate like the commie loving Trump.

Looks like Roberts and Alito representing the right. After 25 years, I am not sure Thomas will want to play in a Liberal Court

Thomas hasn’t been very happy in a conservative Court, either.

 

[flacaltenn]

There are still "classic" liberals that love the Constitution and have a innate distrust of power in govt. Don't mind the fixes to the Constitution DONE LEGALLY. They are called Libertarians. True story..

All liberals love the Constitution.....we wrote it

Except for the 2nd, 5th, 10th amendments and all the POWERS that progressives IMAGINE are in the Constitution, when they are not. Nothing LEFT in the Dem party but folks who love themselves an omnipotent govt that can DICTATE every little flush on a toilet. Or the lights you switch on. Or the Big Gulp that you drink.

You leftists hunted your libertarians (the Blue Dogs) to extinction. Because they EMBARASSED you with dissent on spending and national security. Pretty much PURGED yourselves of anything truly "Liberal" in your party..

We wrote the constitution.
Libertarians are a nonentity. They talk the talk but never accomplish anything
Their...I got mine, fuck everyone else gets tiresome

Liberals wrote the Constitution -- you PURGED all of them. It's all about concentrating power to you today..
If anything, the Libertarian concepts of returning the freedoms and choices that you want to take away make us far in touch with the intentions of the Founders than any present/future "democrat" will ever be. Your idea of liberalism today is nothing more than robbing the rich to redistribute to the poor. And keeping the poor as a domesticated herd that you can depend on for votes.

To you --- packing the Court with ideologues to expand your power and control is a NOBLE thing. A Libertarian choice would simply be vetted -- not by trigger issues -- but by a fundamental interpretation of the document.

Libertarians don't actually do anything.....but they do post a lot on the Internet

Right now -- we're doing a LOT. Actually have a Libertarian in the House of Rep. You've run this arrogant power grab so far into the ditch -- that citizen voters and ELECTED OFFICIALS are APPALLED at the carnage.
Elected officials are MUZZLED out of fear of retribution from their party.

APPALLED that you would be so fucking bent on obtaining and maintaining power that BOTH of the parties would SCARE people into voting out of fear about "packing the court" or any other object that you can rig to be a "dog whistle" or trigger to keep the votes coming in. Just like this thread.

 

[rightwinger]

Scalia Conservative Empty Seat

Kennedy, Anthony Conservative 80 years old (will retire while Hillary is President)

Thomas, Clarence Conservative 68 years ( may retire due to dissatisfaction with a liberal court)

Roberts, John G. Conservative 61 yrs old ( will stay as Chief Justice)

Alito, Samuel Conservative 66 years old (will stay)


Ginsburg, Ruth Liberal 83 years old (will retire under Hillary)

Breyer, Stephen Liberal 78 years old (will retire)

Sotomayor, Sonia Liberal 62 years old (will stay)

Kagan, Elena Liberal 56 years old (will stay)


So Hillary will get to replace 2 liberal and 2 conservative seats (3 if Thomas drops out) giving Liberals a 6-3 edge for the next 25 years or more

The far right, who so wrongly think they are mainstream, have brought this on America because they wanted beyond all reason a candidate like the commie loving Trump.

Looks like Roberts and Alito representing the right. After 25 years, I am not sure Thomas will want to play in a Liberal Court

Thomas hasn’t been very happy in a conservative Court, either.

He didn't have to do much. Scalia did most of the talking

In a liberal court, more of the Conservative burden would shift to Thomas and he would be outvoted in EVERY case

 

[flacaltenn]

So -- I asked a question. Who are the LEADERS of academic thought on "Liberalism in the DNC" in the past 30 years? It's a bunch of power whores who are there to build dynasties. On the SupCt and any other vestige of Democracy they can appropriate.

For all of Clayton's lawyerly contributions -- he misses the ENTIRE PRINCIPLE point -- that case law doesn't mean a damn thing -- if you got the RIGHT asses in the RIGHT seats.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Scalia Conservative Empty Seat

Kennedy, Anthony Conservative 80 years old (will retire while Hillary is President)

Thomas, Clarence Conservative 68 years ( may retire due to dissatisfaction with a liberal court)

Roberts, John G. Conservative 61 yrs old ( will stay as Chief Justice)

Alito, Samuel Conservative 66 years old (will stay)


Ginsburg, Ruth Liberal 83 years old (will retire under Hillary)

Breyer, Stephen Liberal 78 years old (will retire)

Sotomayor, Sonia Liberal 62 years old (will stay)

Kagan, Elena Liberal 56 years old (will stay)


So Hillary will get to replace 2 liberal and 2 conservative seats (3 if Thomas drops out) giving Liberals a 6-3 edge for the next 25 years or more

What’s both interesting and important is that with a ‘liberal’ Court there really won’t be much in the way of change – as it should be; where non-conservative justices will respect established precedent and the rule of law:

Women needn’t fear that their right to privacy will be violated by the states.

Gay Americans needn’t fear their equal protection rights will be violated by the states.

And what change does come will be positive and consistent with long-standing legal doctrine, particularly true should Shelby County be overturned, once again making voting rights paramount, and safeguarding those rights with the upmost protection from abuse by the states.

Last, the notion that a non-conservative Court would ‘jeopardize’ the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment is as unfounded as it is wrong.

Indeed, the Heller Court reaffirmed a fact of Constitutional law liberals have always accepted and observed: that the Second Amendment right is not ‘unlimited.' "It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose[,]” that the Second Amendment right is subject to reasonable restrictions by government, consistent with Second Amendment jurisprudence – jurisprudence all justices must follow and respect, liberal or conservative.

 

[Wyatt earp]

A liberal court will mean

End of the death penalty

How? What cases now going through the lower courts?

End of Citizens United

They won't touch that case, the supreme court already ruled on it.

Rollback of Heller

At work, what's that

Protection of abortion rights

Who has been attacking them?

Protection of gay rights

Again gay marriage already legal.


I

End of the death penalty

How? What cases now going through the lower courts?

End of Citizens United

They won't touch that case, the supreme court already ruled on it.

Rollback of Heller

At work, what's that

Protection of abortion rights

Who has been attacking them?

Protection of gay rights

Again gay marriage already legal.

Most states already don't use the death penalty. Only Jesusland insists on it

I give it ten years tops

? Last I read states were putting on hold because of they couldn't get hold of the cocktail mix...

I still don't know what you are talking about and why the Supreme court would get involved.

It seems to me with out even researching it the SS already had a bunch of cases on it, when it was reinstated and ruled constintional ,

So with that being said it is extremely rare that the Supreme Court revisits a past Supreme court ruling. As rare as an amendment to the constitution and as rare as a Supreme court overturning a presidents E.O.

So don't get your hopes up on them revisiting this case or Cooperations are people too and I still don't have a clue about why they would have to strengthen gay rights or roe vs. wade.



Btw for some reason you guys don't mention that SS case also helped Union influence and donations.

 

[Al Azar]

SCOTUS revisits issues when different arguments are made and different hairs need splitting.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Citizen's United is in the bull's eye if HRC is elected.

 

[Al Azar]

Citizen's United is in the bull's eye if HRC is elected.

Good. It's a constitutional abomination.