The Supreme Court Hearings

[DGS49]

As you watch or read about the coming hearings on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, you must never lose sight of the real issue.

The role of the Supreme Court is to determine, in individual, real cases, whether the law has been properly applied, and whether either the law or its application in a given case is consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution.

Parenthetically I will point out that the USSC does not have either the power or the opportunity to make general binding statements about whether a law is totally off-base, stupid, counterproductive, or pointless. Their jurisdiction is limited to what is stated in the foregoing paragraph.

Leftists on the Supreme Court have a long history of looking at a case, deciding how they think it should turn out, then writing long meandering opinions to justify their votes, which usually fly in the face of the clear meaning of the Constitution. If an opinion is longer than twenty pages, it is almost certainly a justification of violating or ignoring the Constitution, or simply writing new "Constitutional" provisions, "out of whole cloth," as the saying goes. These circumlocutions have resulted in the creation of a fictitious "Right of Privacy," found nowhere in the Constitution, the creation of "Affirmative Action," which was then morphed into the quest for "diversity," the "right" to get an abortion, and other "Constitutional" abominations.

Nobody cares that Judge Jackson is "Black" or female, and she certainly seems like a nice enough person. No one will vote for or against her confirmation because she would be "the first Black female justice in U.S. history." The fact is that any competent attorney has the intellectual horsepower to be a Supreme Court Justice, especially given the fact that they can hire the best law school grads in the country every year to be their clerks.

The Left will support her, violently if necessary, because they know that she will, for many many years, be a traditional Leftist jurist, willing to bend, fold, and/or mutilate the Constitution in order to justify the desired Leftist result in any case. The Right will oppose her for the very same reason. Indeed, she has already indicated in her opinions from the bench that she is willing to ignore the Constitution to reach the results she desires.

She will be confirmed and take a seat on the court. She will not be accused of being a rapist, pedophile, drunk, drug addict, or bigamist. Only Democrats do those things.

But don't be distracted. The real issue is her willingness to ignore the Constitution and precedent in order to vote THE RIGHT WAY on contentious cases.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Biden chose Jackson because she is a radical and a racist, just like the Democrat Party is.
The corrupt Democrat Party is rapidly goosestepping towards a neo-marxist police state and Jackson is going to help them get there.

 

[BackAgain]

As you watch or read about the coming hearings on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, you must never lose sight of the real issue.

The role of the Supreme Court is to determine, in individual, real cases, whether the law has been properly applied, and whether either the law or its application in a given case is consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution.

Parenthetically I will point out that the USSC does not have either the power or the opportunity to make general binding statements about whether a law is totally off-base, stupid, counterproductive, or pointless. Their jurisdiction is limited to what is stated in the foregoing paragraph.

Leftists on the Supreme Court have a long history of looking at a case, deciding how they think it should turn out, then writing long meandering opinions to justify their votes, which usually fly in the face of the clear meaning of the Constitution. If an opinion is longer than twenty pages, it is almost certainly a justification of violating or ignoring the Constitution, or simply writing new "Constitutional" provisions, "out of whole cloth," as the saying goes. These circumlocutions have resulted in the creation of a fictitious "Right of Privacy," found nowhere in the Constitution, the creation of "Affirmative Action," which was then morphed into the quest for "diversity," the "right" to get an abortion, and other "Constitutional" abominations.

Nobody cares that Judge Jackson is "Black" or female, and she certainly seems like a nice enough person. No one will vote for or against her confirmation because she would be "the first Black female justice in U.S. history." The fact is that any competent attorney has the intellectual horsepower to be a Supreme Court Justice, especially given the fact that they can hire the best law school grads in the country every year to be their clerks.

The Left will support her, violently if necessary, because they know that she will, for many many years, be a traditional Leftist jurist, willing to bend, fold, and/or mutilate the Constitution in order to justify the desired Leftist result in any case. The Right will oppose her for the very same reason. Indeed, she has already indicated in her opinions from the bench that she is willing to ignore the Constitution to reach the results she desires.

She will be confirmed and take a seat on the court. She will not be accused of being a rapist, pedophile, drunk, drug addict, or bigamist. Only Democrats do those things.

But don't be distracted. The real issue is her willingness to ignore the Constitution and precedent in order to vote THE RIGHT WAY on contentious cases.

If not 100% accurate, plenty close enough. Good OP.

 

[Ringtone]

As you watch or read about the coming hearings on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, you must never lose sight of the real issue.

The role of the Supreme Court is to determine, in individual, real cases, whether the law has been properly applied, and whether either the law or its application in a given case is consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution.

Parenthetically I will point out that the USSC does not have either the power or the opportunity to make general binding statements about whether a law is totally off-base, stupid, counterproductive, or pointless. Their jurisdiction is limited to what is stated in the foregoing paragraph.

Leftists on the Supreme Court have a long history of looking at a case, deciding how they think it should turn out, then writing long meandering opinions to justify their votes, which usually fly in the face of the clear meaning of the Constitution. If an opinion is longer than twenty pages, it is almost certainly a justification of violating or ignoring the Constitution, or simply writing new "Constitutional" provisions, "out of whole cloth," as the saying goes. These circumlocutions have resulted in the creation of a fictitious "Right of Privacy," found nowhere in the Constitution, the creation of "Affirmative Action," which was then morphed into the quest for "diversity," the "right" to get an abortion, and other "Constitutional" abominations.

Nobody cares that Judge Jackson is "Black" or female, and she certainly seems like a nice enough person. No one will vote for or against her confirmation because she would be "the first Black female justice in U.S. history." The fact is that any competent attorney has the intellectual horsepower to be a Supreme Court Justice, especially given the fact that they can hire the best law school grads in the country every year to be their clerks.

The Left will support her, violently if necessary, because they know that she will, for many many years, be a traditional Leftist jurist, willing to bend, fold, and/or mutilate the Constitution in order to justify the desired Leftist result in any case. The Right will oppose her for the very same reason. Indeed, she has already indicated in her opinions from the bench that she is willing to ignore the Constitution to reach the results she desires.

She will be confirmed and take a seat on the court. She will not be accused of being a rapist, pedophile, drunk, drug addict, or bigamist. Only Democrats do those things.

But don't be distracted. The real issue is her willingness to ignore the Constitution and precedent in order to vote THE RIGHT WAY on contentious cases.

Close enough.

 

[JGalt]

As you watch or read about the coming hearings on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, you must never lose sight of the real issue.

The role of the Supreme Court is to determine, in individual, real cases, whether the law has been properly applied, and whether either the law or its application in a given case is consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution.

Parenthetically I will point out that the USSC does not have either the power or the opportunity to make general binding statements about whether a law is totally off-base, stupid, counterproductive, or pointless. Their jurisdiction is limited to what is stated in the foregoing paragraph.

Leftists on the Supreme Court have a long history of looking at a case, deciding how they think it should turn out, then writing long meandering opinions to justify their votes, which usually fly in the face of the clear meaning of the Constitution. If an opinion is longer than twenty pages, it is almost certainly a justification of violating or ignoring the Constitution, or simply writing new "Constitutional" provisions, "out of whole cloth," as the saying goes. These circumlocutions have resulted in the creation of a fictitious "Right of Privacy," found nowhere in the Constitution, the creation of "Affirmative Action," which was then morphed into the quest for "diversity," the "right" to get an abortion, and other "Constitutional" abominations.

Nobody cares that Judge Jackson is "Black" or female, and she certainly seems like a nice enough person. No one will vote for or against her confirmation because she would be "the first Black female justice in U.S. history." The fact is that any competent attorney has the intellectual horsepower to be a Supreme Court Justice, especially given the fact that they can hire the best law school grads in the country every year to be their clerks.

The Left will support her, violently if necessary, because they know that she will, for many many years, be a traditional Leftist jurist, willing to bend, fold, and/or mutilate the Constitution in order to justify the desired Leftist result in any case. The Right will oppose her for the very same reason. Indeed, she has already indicated in her opinions from the bench that she is willing to ignore the Constitution to reach the results she desires.

She will be confirmed and take a seat on the court. She will not be accused of being a rapist, pedophile, drunk, drug addict, or bigamist. Only Democrats do those things.

But don't be distracted. The real issue is her willingness to ignore the Constitution and precedent in order to vote THE RIGHT WAY on contentious cases.

Liberal SC Justices rarely rule by the way the constitution was written. They rule according to the way they'd like to see it re-written.

 

[Clipper]

Biden chose Jackson because she is a radical and a racist, just like the Democrat Party is.
The corrupt Democrat Party is rapidly goosestepping towards a neo-marxist police state and Jackson is going to help them get there.

Thanks for chiming in & confirming that you're nothing but a right wing idiot.

Keep em coming, genius.

 

[whoisit]

Get a load of Mexicos immigration laws,

 

[Augustine_]

As you watch or read about the coming hearings on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, you must never lose sight of the real issue.

The role of the Supreme Court is to determine, in individual, real cases, whether the law has been properly applied, and whether either the law or its application in a given case is consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution.

Parenthetically I will point out that the USSC does not have either the power or the opportunity to make general binding statements about whether a law is totally off-base, stupid, counterproductive, or pointless. Their jurisdiction is limited to what is stated in the foregoing paragraph.

Leftists on the Supreme Court have a long history of looking at a case, deciding how they think it should turn out, then writing long meandering opinions to justify their votes, which usually fly in the face of the clear meaning of the Constitution. If an opinion is longer than twenty pages, it is almost certainly a justification of violating or ignoring the Constitution, or simply writing new "Constitutional" provisions, "out of whole cloth," as the saying goes. These circumlocutions have resulted in the creation of a fictitious "Right of Privacy," found nowhere in the Constitution, the creation of "Affirmative Action," which was then morphed into the quest for "diversity," the "right" to get an abortion, and other "Constitutional" abominations.

Nobody cares that Judge Jackson is "Black" or female, and she certainly seems like a nice enough person. No one will vote for or against her confirmation because she would be "the first Black female justice in U.S. history." The fact is that any competent attorney has the intellectual horsepower to be a Supreme Court Justice, especially given the fact that they can hire the best law school grads in the country every year to be their clerks.

The Left will support her, violently if necessary, because they know that she will, for many many years, be a traditional Leftist jurist, willing to bend, fold, and/or mutilate the Constitution in order to justify the desired Leftist result in any case. The Right will oppose her for the very same reason. Indeed, she has already indicated in her opinions from the bench that she is willing to ignore the Constitution to reach the results she desires.

She will be confirmed and take a seat on the court. She will not be accused of being a rapist, pedophile, drunk, drug addict, or bigamist. Only Democrats do those things.

But don't be distracted. The real issue is her willingness to ignore the Constitution and precedent in order to vote THE RIGHT WAY on contentious cases.

All that matters is if the ruling party has the numbers. These hearings are a waste of time.

 

[San Souci]

Biden chose Jackson because she is a radical and a racist, just like the Democrat Party is.
The corrupt Democrat Party is rapidly goosestepping towards a neo-marxist police state and Jackson is going to help them get there.

Face it. She is another Token. Just like Harris.

 

[DGS49]

Jackson Is Handing Conservatives One Key Victory

The point to take away from these hearings is this: KBJ is compelled to spout Constitutional Conservative talking points in these hearings because she knows that with respect to Judicial matters, the American public is staunchly on the side of Constitutional Conservatism.

She is NOT talking about a "living document," or any of that rot. She says she will look to the actual words of the Constitution, not make new laws or principles, not "legislate from the bench," even though that is exactly what she intends to do, because she knows that Americans abhor that philosophy and the Justices who practice it.

So mark it well. Not only has Conservatism won the ideological battle with the American public, but the Leftists know it and feel compelled to hide their true intentions behind the talking points that any true Conservative would use in the same situation.

It is a tiny cause for celebration.

 

[Clipper]

Jackson Is Handing Conservatives One Key Victory

The point to take away from these hearings is this: KBJ is compelled to spout Constitutional Conservative talking points in these hearings because she knows that with respect to Judicial matters, the American public is staunchly on the side of Constitutional Conservatism.

She is NOT talking about a "living document," or any of that rot. She says she will look to the actual words of the Constitution, not make new laws or principles, not "legislate from the bench," even though that is exactly what she intends to do, because she knows that Americans abhor that philosophy and the Justices who practice it.

So mark it well. Not only has Conservatism won the ideological battle with the American public, but the Leftists know it and feel compelled to hide their true intentions behind the talking points that any true Conservative would use in the same situation.

It is a tiny cause for celebration.

Amercans abhor the philosophy you referred to because they been brainwashed by right wing media scum like the late Rush Limbaugh & Sean Hannity among others who do the bidding of the 2%ers who run this Country. Conservatives won the philosophical battle? Really? Did you miss the election where Trumps party lost the W.H., the senate & the house?

 

[San Souci]

Amercans abhor the philosophy you referred to because they been brainwashed by right wing media scum like the late Rush Limbaugh & Sean Hannity among others who do the bidding of the 2%ers who run this Country. Conservatives won the philosophical battle? Really? Did you miss the election where Trumps party lost the W.H., the senate & the house?

Those RICH guys? You mean like Bezos ,Zuckerberg ,Dorsey ,and Soros? Who CONTROL the Media? Here is a clue. The back Lefties. MONEY! Lefties are easier to control. Lefties are easier to Bribe. Lefties use violence to get their way. And these RICH guys PROFIT on these gullible swine.

 

[San Souci]

As far as Katanga Jackson ,she doesn't even know what a WOMAN is. Now THAT was FUNNY.

 

[USAF 2023]

As far as Katanga Jackson ,she doesn't even know what a WOMAN is. Now THAT was FUNNY.

It’s not funny; it’s pathetic. She states she wasn’t good at biology? A woman has her period, able to reproduce, has a uterus, etc. Anyone with HALF a brain knows that a female’s chromosomes are XX and a males XY. Know why she’s not answering? The TRANSGENDER CROWD!!!!!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As you watch or read about the coming hearings on the nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, you must never lose sight of the real issue.

The role of the Supreme Court is to determine, in individual, real cases, whether the law has been properly applied, and whether either the law or its application in a given case is consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution.

Parenthetically I will point out that the USSC does not have either the power or the opportunity to make general binding statements about whether a law is totally off-base, stupid, counterproductive, or pointless. Their jurisdiction is limited to what is stated in the foregoing paragraph.

Leftists on the Supreme Court have a long history of looking at a case, deciding how they think it should turn out, then writing long meandering opinions to justify their votes, which usually fly in the face of the clear meaning of the Constitution. If an opinion is longer than twenty pages, it is almost certainly a justification of violating or ignoring the Constitution, or simply writing new "Constitutional" provisions, "out of whole cloth," as the saying goes. These circumlocutions have resulted in the creation of a fictitious "Right of Privacy," found nowhere in the Constitution, the creation of "Affirmative Action," which was then morphed into the quest for "diversity," the "right" to get an abortion, and other "Constitutional" abominations.

Nobody cares that Judge Jackson is "Black" or female, and she certainly seems like a nice enough person. No one will vote for or against her confirmation because she would be "the first Black female justice in U.S. history." The fact is that any competent attorney has the intellectual horsepower to be a Supreme Court Justice, especially given the fact that they can hire the best law school grads in the country every year to be their clerks.

The Left will support her, violently if necessary, because they know that she will, for many many years, be a traditional Leftist jurist, willing to bend, fold, and/or mutilate the Constitution in order to justify the desired Leftist result in any case. The Right will oppose her for the very same reason. Indeed, she has already indicated in her opinions from the bench that she is willing to ignore the Constitution to reach the results she desires.

She will be confirmed and take a seat on the court. She will not be accused of being a rapist, pedophile, drunk, drug addict, or bigamist. Only Democrats do those things.

But don't be distracted. The real issue is her willingness to ignore the Constitution and precedent in order to vote THE RIGHT WAY on contentious cases.

I didn't read all that you posted but what I read was insightful. However one of the biggest reasons for the supreme Court is to insure laws are constitutional.

 

[BS Filter]

After watching the nominee I have determined she isn't qualified. She is obviously angry and exasperated at being asked probing questions. She is also obviously swayed more by political correctness than reality by refusing to answer the simple question about defining a woman. She also claimed to not be familiar with the Dred Scott decision. As a Black lawyer who is supposed to be highly intelligent, I find that simply ludicrous.

 

[USAF 2023]

As far as Katanga Jackson ,she doesn't even know what a WOMAN is. Now THAT was FUNNY.

It’s not funny; it’s pathetic. She states she wasn’t good at biology? A woman has her period, able to reproduce, has a uterus, etc. Anyone with HALF a brain knows that a female’s chromosomes are XX and a males XY. Know why she’s not answering? The TRANSGENDER CROWD!!!!!

After watching the nominee I have determined she isn't qualified. She is obviously angry and exasperated at being asked probing questions. She is also obviously swayed more by political correctness than reality by refusing to answer the simple question about defining a woman. She also claimed to not be familiar with the Dred Scott decision. As a Black lawyer who is supposed to be highly intelligent, I find that simply ludicrous.

She’s married to a Physician. Maybe HE can explain to her what makes up a biological woman, She gave that answer because she doesn’t want to upset the TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY!!!

 

[BS Filter]

It’s not funny; it’s pathetic. She states she wasn’t good at biology? A woman has her period, able to reproduce, has a uterus, etc. Anyone with HALF a brain knows that a female’s chromosomes are XX and a males XY. Know why she’s not answering? The TRANSGENDER CROWD!!!!!

She’s married to a Physician. Maybe HE can explain to her what makes up a biological woman, She gave that answer because she doesn’t want to upset the TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY!!!

Yeah, a microscopic community. I bet she has no problem speaking her mind about Christianity and offending millions.

 

[San Souci]

It’s not funny; it’s pathetic. She states she wasn’t good at biology? A woman has her period, able to reproduce, has a uterus, etc. Anyone with HALF a brain knows that a female’s chromosomes are XX and a males XY. Know why she’s not answering? The TRANSGENDER CROWD!!!!!

She’s married to a Physician. Maybe HE can explain to her what makes up a biological woman, She gave that answer because she doesn’t want to upset the TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY!!!

There were not any trannys when I went to School. These sick perverts are indeed sick perverts.

 

[BS Filter]

There were not any trannys when I went to School. These sick perverts are indeed sick perverts.

It's the newest fad. Democrat's latest minority to champion for rights and demonize anyone with common sense who won't bend their knee to political correctness.