The Supreme Court Is The Last Word On Nothing

[Lesh]

Make all the laws you want you communist puke Dems, the SCOTUS will overrule them as unconstitutional. Tissue?

Which ends the “they should have written laws to protect it” argument

 

[Oddball]

Let’s start here: Article 3 of the Constitution gives the Supreme Court “original jurisdiction” in all cases affecting “Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party.” That part is obviously in effect, although most cases between states occur in the lower federal courts established by Congress. The Constitution then states that in all other cases, “the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction.” This, too, is in full effect.

But then the Constitution tells us that the court’s appellate jurisdiction is subject to “such Exceptions” and “under such Regulations” as “the Congress shall make.”

This is where it gets interesting. The court’s appellate jurisdiction accounts for virtually everything it touches. And the Constitution says that Congress can regulate the nature of that jurisdiction. Congress can strip the court of its ability to hear certain cases, or it can mandate new rules for how the court decides cases where it has appellate jurisdiction. And as I recently mentioned, it can even tell the court that it needs a supermajority of justices to declare a federal law or previous decision unconstitutional.

Opinion | The Supreme Court Is the Final Word on Nothing (Published 2022)

It, too, can be checked and balanced.

www.nytimes.com

Stay tuned. There are other remedies other than adding seats to reign in an out of control activist court. All of them Constitutional.

We lost.....Time to change the rules!

 

[BluesLegend]

Which ends the “they should have written laws to protect it” argument

The legislative branch writes the laws. The judicial branch decides if those laws are constitutional.

 

[BluesLegend]

We lost.....Time to change the rules!

America hates cheaters who do this.

 

[Muhammed]

It's actually in the Constitution.

Bullshit.

Go ahead, and cite the Article, Section and Clause. Go ahead and search for it.

Here's a link to the US Constitution, since you've obviously never read it.

The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

[get-content name="print-page-left" include-tag="false" /] Note: The following text is a transcription of the Constitution as it was inscribed by Jacob Shallus on parchment (the document on display in the Rotunda at the National Archives Museum.) The spelling and punctuation reflect the original.

www.archives.gov

How can you be 64 years old and still not know that the NYT is a fake news outlet? You must be a very slow learner.

 

[Votto]

Let’s start here: Article 3 of the Constitution gives the Supreme Court “original jurisdiction” in all cases affecting “Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party.” That part is obviously in effect, although most cases between states occur in the lower federal courts established by Congress. The Constitution then states that in all other cases, “the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction.” This, too, is in full effect.

But then the Constitution tells us that the court’s appellate jurisdiction is subject to “such Exceptions” and “under such Regulations” as “the Congress shall make.”

This is where it gets interesting. The court’s appellate jurisdiction accounts for virtually everything it touches. And the Constitution says that Congress can regulate the nature of that jurisdiction. Congress can strip the court of its ability to hear certain cases, or it can mandate new rules for how the court decides cases where it has appellate jurisdiction. And as I recently mentioned, it can even tell the court that it needs a supermajority of justices to declare a federal law or previous decision unconstitutional.

Opinion | The Supreme Court Is the Final Word on Nothing (Published 2022)

It, too, can be checked and balanced.

www.nytimes.com

Stay tuned. There are other remedies other than adding seats to reign in an out of control activist court. All of them Constitutional.

The case Marbury vs. Madison gave the Supreme court the authority to declare what is Constitutional and what is not.

At the time, Thomas Jefferson blew a gasket and objected, but his concerns were ultimately laid aside and ignored.

After all, it is absurd to think that what is Constitutional and what is not depends on 9 partisan black robes that are appointed stooges, which is they Jefferson objected.

That is why I'm delighted that the matter of abortion rights be passed down to the states where they belong.

Thomas Jefferson is smiling.

If the Left ever tries to outlaw guns, for example, no one will care. They can try to use as much of their clever legal mumbo jumbo but no one will care because we can all read the Second Amendment like everyone else can. And they can repeal the Second Amendment if they like, but that still won't convince at least half the country as law enforcement all across the country will refuse to round up the guns.

 

[BluesLegend]

The Trump SCOTUS will continue to dismantle the Dem's attempts to end run around the people and legislate in the courts. Perhaps Trumps greatest legacy.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Let’s start here: Article 3 of the Constitution gives the Supreme Court “original jurisdiction” in all cases affecting “Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party.” That part is obviously in effect, although most cases between states occur in the lower federal courts established by Congress. The Constitution then states that in all other cases, “the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction.” This, too, is in full effect.

But then the Constitution tells us that the court’s appellate jurisdiction is subject to “such Exceptions” and “under such Regulations” as “the Congress shall make.”

This is where it gets interesting. The court’s appellate jurisdiction accounts for virtually everything it touches. And the Constitution says that Congress can regulate the nature of that jurisdiction. Congress can strip the court of its ability to hear certain cases, or it can mandate new rules for how the court decides cases where it has appellate jurisdiction. And as I recently mentioned, it can even tell the court that it needs a supermajority of justices to declare a federal law or previous decision unconstitutional.

Opinion | The Supreme Court Is the Final Word on Nothing (Published 2022)

It, too, can be checked and balanced.

www.nytimes.com

Stay tuned. There are other remedies other than adding seats to reign in an out of control activist court. All of them Constitutional.

Yeah, good luck with that.

 

[Jets]

I do not believe the Exceptions Clause would work like this. It would essentially allow a blanket check on the Supreme Court based on the current make up of Congress.

 

[skews13]

America hates cheaters who do this.

Applying the rules the Constitution gives the Congress power to do, isn't cheating. Like the title says, the court isn't the last word. Congress is.

Americans do hate the cheating McConnell did to pack the court with illegitimate justices. And that will be remedied in due time. According to the rules.

 

[Votto]

I do not believe the Exceptions Clause would work like this. It would essentially allow a blanket check on the Supreme Court based on the current make up of Congress.

I love it when Dims insist on term limits for SCOTUS but not for their stooges in Congress

Hilarious

What a bunch of illegitimate morons.

 

[Votto]

Applying the rules the Constitution gives the Congress power to do, isn't cheating. Like the title says, the court isn't the last word. Congress is.

Americans do hate the cheating McConnell did to pack the court with illegitimate justices. And that will be remedied in due time. According to the rules.

No matter which way you rule, half the country will want to secede

This is why the matter should be left up to blue and red states respectively.

Problem is, you are a socialist, and as such, demand power over everything and anything cuz your beliefs and ideas are just that good.

 

[scruffy]

Let’s start here: Article 3 of the Constitution gives the Supreme Court “original jurisdiction” in all cases affecting “Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party.” That part is obviously in effect, although most cases between states occur in the lower federal courts established by Congress. The Constitution then states that in all other cases, “the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction.” This, too, is in full effect.

But then the Constitution tells us that the court’s appellate jurisdiction is subject to “such Exceptions” and “under such Regulations” as “the Congress shall make.”

This is where it gets interesting. The court’s appellate jurisdiction accounts for virtually everything it touches. And the Constitution says that Congress can regulate the nature of that jurisdiction. Congress can strip the court of its ability to hear certain cases, or it can mandate new rules for how the court decides cases where it has appellate jurisdiction. And as I recently mentioned, it can even tell the court that it needs a supermajority of justices to declare a federal law or previous decision unconstitutional.

Opinion | The Supreme Court Is the Final Word on Nothing (Published 2022)

It, too, can be checked and balanced.

www.nytimes.com

Stay tuned. There are other remedies other than adding seats to reign in an out of control activist court. All of them Constitutional.

Hey fucktard, you're not going to destroy our institutions of government.

I won't let you.

You're going to have to get by me first

You're going to have to KILL ME DEAD before that happens.

Are you ready to do that?

Cause I'll kill you first, shit for brains. You'll die before I will

 

[skews13]

The case Marbury vs. Madison gave the Supreme court the authority to declare what is Constitutional and what is not.

At the time, Thomas Jefferson blew a gasket and objected, but his concerns were ultimately laid aside and ignored.

After all, it is absurd to think that what is Constitutional and what is not depends on 9 partisan black robes that are appointed stooges, which is they Jefferson objected.

That is why I'm delighted that the matter of abortion rights be passed down to the states where they belong.

Thomas Jefferson is smiling.

If the Left ever tries to outlaw guns, for example, no one will care. They can try to use as much of their clever legal mumbo jumbo but no one will care because we can all read the Second Amendment like everyone else can. And they can repeal the Second Amendment if they like, but that still won't convince at least half the country as law enforcement all across the country will refuse to round up the guns.

The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working underground to undermine our Constitution from a co-ordinate of a general and special government to a general supreme one alone. This will lay all things at their feet. … I will say, that “against this every man should raise his voice,” and, more, should uplift his arm … — Letter to Thomas Ritchie, Sept. 1820

Jefferson saw judicial tyranny as an all-out assault on the Constitution.

I fear, dear Sir, we are now in such another crisis [as when the Alien and Sedition Laws were enacted], with this difference only, that the judiciary branch is alone and single-handed in the present assaults on the Constitution. But its assaults are more sure and deadly, as from an agent seemingly passive and unassuming. — Letter to Mr. Nicholas, Dec. 1821

He saw judicial tyranny as the greatest danger to the nation.

… there is no danger I apprehend so much as the consolidation of our government by the noiseless, and therefore unalarming, instrumentality of the Supreme Court. — Letter to William Johnson, Mar. 1823

For judges to usurp the powers of the legislature is unconstitutional judicial tyranny.

… One single object … will entitle you to the endless gratitude of society; that of restraining judges from usurping legislation. — Letter to Edward Livingston, Mar. 1825

 

[BluesLegend]

Applying the rules the Constitution gives the Congress power to do, isn't cheating. Like the title says, the court isn't the last word. Congress is.

Americans do hate the cheating McConnell did to pack the court with illegitimate justices. And that will be remedied in due time. According to the rules.

We'll just listen to actual experts in law with degrees okay.

 

[scruffy]

We'll just listen to actual experts in law with degrees okay.

These shit for brains progtards are INSANE.

THEY'RE TAKING THEIR MARCHING ORDERS FROM A BUNCH OF PSYCHOPATHS.

Wake up, America.

Those crazy bastards Hitler and Stalin are back, and they're among us.

 

[Lesh]

We lost.....Time to change the rules!

View attachment 665546

That's what you folks are doing with elections all cross the country

 

[BluesLegend]

These shit for brains progtards are INSANE.

THEY'RE TAKING THEIR MARCHING ORDERS FROM A BUNCH OF PSYCHOPATHS.

Wake up, America.

Those crazy bastards Hitler and Stalin are back, and they're among us.

Dems are DUMB hence their stupid threads. I say whatever, the Trump SCOTUS will bitch slap Dems for decades and undo all their attempts to legislate from the bench. Dems are screwed now. Meanwhile the idiots don't get it, Trump paved the way for multiple more Trump like POTUS to come, the Dem pain and suffering has only just begun.

 

[BluesLegend]

That's what you folks are doing with elections all cross the country

No we are leveling the playing field you lying cheating Dem scumbags.

 

[Oddball]

That's what you folks are doing with elections all cross the country.

"You folks"?!?

I don't vote at all and find elections pretty much meaningless....The blatant cheatery of, and changing of the rules at the last moment by, "you folks" last time around vindicates my particular POV.