The power of the Supreme Court in the states

[PoliticalChic]

usually it's vice verse, commies use roman-german low

I asked you to provide the material you claimed to have read.....it appears you can't.

 

[rupol2000]

I asked you to provide the material you claimed to have read.....it appears you can't.

What exactly? In all communist and socialist regimes, Romano-Germanic law, except for England throughout the EU and Russia as well. You can find it yourself, it is well known.
When Napoleon broke the revolution, the first thing he did was abolish case law.

 

[SavannahMann]

But the Supreme Court cannot challenge the decisions of the state courts, because they are not subject to them.

If the State Court decision is based upon State Law without an applicable Federal Law or Constitutional Right. The Supreme Court doesn’t get involved. If there is an applicable Federal law or Constitutional Right the Federal Courts can.

All of this was covered in Civics class for those of us who went to school.

 

[rupol2000]

Apparently this is due to the fact that Romano-Germanic law was slave-owning, and case law was partly inherited from traditional law.

 

[rupol2000]

If the State Court decision is based upon State Law without an applicable Federal Law or Constitutional Right. The Supreme Court doesn’t get involved. If there is an applicable Federal law or Constitutional Right the Federal Courts can.

All of this was covered in Civics class for those of us who went to school.

Then it turns out that if there was no federal definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, the Supreme Court could not put pressure on the states?

 

[PoliticalChic]

What exactly? In all communist and socialist regimes, Romano-Germanic law, except for England throughout the EU and Russia as well. You can find it yourself, it is well known.
When Napoleon broke the revolution, the first thing he did was abolish case law.

No.....you will not be allowed to change the subject.

 

[SavannahMann]

Then it turns out that if there was no federal definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, the Supreme Court could not put pressure on the states?

Actually they could. If you were Gay and got Married in California. You returned home to Texas and decided to divorce. Texas would have to recognize the marriage and have normal procedures to dissolve it.

Once a single state recognized Gay Marriage all states had to. Otherwise the laws of the state to perform a legal wedding would be curtailed. This is where the Supremes came in. When your marriage would not be recognized in all the states.

Reciprocity means your Drivers License and other things are valid in all states. Including your wedding certificate. If you are legally married in Nevada you are legally married everywhere. If you choose to get divorced in Arkansas which is your State of Residence. Arkansas can’t just say no. And the legal wedding certificate is valid for your state Taxes. They can’t claim it isn’t valid and force you to file separately.

 

[rupol2000]

No.....you will not be allowed to change the subject.

about the subjugation of the courts? It was in Russian. But it seems to be more complicated there, you have a network of federal courts, they subject to either the fed department or the High Court, and there are local courts. I have not yet understood how their powers are delineated.

 

[PoliticalChic]

about the subjugation of the courts? It was in Russian. But it seems to be more complicated there, you have a network of federal courts, they subject to either the fed department or the High Court, and there are local courts. I have not yet understood how their powers are delineated.

Is this your retraction?

 

[rupol2000]

Actually they could. If you were Gay and got Married in California. You returned home to Texas and decided to divorce. Texas would have to recognize the marriage and have normal procedures to dissolve it.

Once a single state recognized Gay Marriage all states had to. Otherwise the laws of the state to perform a legal wedding would be curtailed. This is where the Supremes came in. When your marriage would not be recognized in all the states.

Reciprocity means your Drivers License and other things are valid in all states. Including your wedding certificate. If you are legally married in Nevada you are legally married everywhere. If you choose to get divorced in Arkansas which is your State of Residence. Arkansas can’t just say no. And the legal wedding certificate is valid for your state Taxes. They can’t claim it isn’t valid and force you to file separately.

I think that this is a restriction of the freedom of the states. I see no problem in not recognizing in Texas what is recognized in New York

 

[rupol2000]

Is this your retraction?

Which courts deal with marriage in the states, federal or local?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I think that this is a restriction of the freedom of the states. I see no problem in not recognizing in Texas what is recognized in New York

We've just reduced all of your posts to an admission that you were wrong.

Who cares what you 'think.'

 

[rupol2000]

We've just reduced all of your posts to an admission that you were wrong.

Who cares what you 'think.'

You have a leftist slave mentality, that's why you're for trumpsters. Trumpsters are purely leftist, so they are for faggots. The circle has closed, the loop around the United States has tightened.

 

[rupol2000]

We've just reduced all of your posts to an admission that you were wrong.

Who cares what you 'think.'

No, federal courts do not deal with marriage. So it's all right

Federal Courts & the Public

Jury Service U.S. citizens at least 18 years of age may be called to jury service, one of the most important ways individual citizens become involved with the federal courts. Learn more about jury service and what to do if you were summoned to federal jury service. Court Cases Federal courts...

www.uscourts.gov

 

[PoliticalChic]

You have a leftist slave mentality, that's why you're for trumpsters. Trumpsters are purely leftist, so they are for faggots. The circle has closed, the loop around the United States has tightened.

I love ramming your lies back down your throat.

But this post of yours saves me the trouble.

 

[SavannahMann]

I think that this is a restriction of the freedom of the states. I see no problem in not recognizing in Texas what is recognized in New York

Ok. So what should be recognized across state lines?

 

[rupol2000]

Ok. So what should be recognized across state lines?

Ideally, only the constitution

 

[Esdraelon]

But the Supreme Court cannot challenge the decisions of the state courts, because they are not subject to them.

This is incorrect but not surprising that you'd believe it. The Left is getting comfortable with ignoring our Constitution unless it supports their plans. What they don't account for is the lawlessness being used by their political foes, as well. This double standard is going to blow up in their faces soon.

 

[Esdraelon]

None of those was constitutional.

Quite true, which makes the actions of SCOTUS in 2020 that much more reprehensible.

 

[Esdraelon]

Apparently this is due to the fact that Romano-Germanic law was slave-owning, and case law was partly inherited from traditional law.

U.S. jurisprudence springs from English Common Law. The only exception in the states is Louisiana which is based on the Napoleonic tradition.