This is why liberals have replaced the Constitution with the Supreme Court

[P@triot]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

 

[alang1216]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

Everyone loves an activist court when they agree with the decision. I didn't hear any conservatives complain when the court ruled the 2nd amendment was a personal right or that corporations were people. I heard plenty of conservative talk about radically changing the court when it ruled in favor of gay marriage. Of course the left was no different.

Her personal attack on Trump aside (she has rightly apologized) I recall Scalia was pretty outspoken on his personal views. Everyone has their personal views but they can still do their job.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

So you oppose the Court being 'stacked' with conservatives. Interesting.

 

[Pogo]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

Yyyyeah um..... actually Liberals wrote the Constitution. You lose.

/thread

 

[Camp]

Isn't SCOTUS, how it is staffed and operates part of the Constitution?

 

[P@triot]

Everyone loves an activist court when they agree with the decision. I didn't hear any conservatives complain when the court ruled the 2nd amendment was a personal right.

That's because it is a personal right. The Constitution says so. So why would anybody complain about the Supreme Court properly upholding the U.S. Constitution?!?

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

In addition- here are original writings from our founders (many of them) clearly stating that the 2nd Amendment is a personal rights:
X-Patriot (Constitutional Writes) | 2A

Hell - for that matter - all rights are personal rights. Does the 1st Amendment only apply to an organization? Does the 5th Amendment only apply to a foundation?

Her personal attack on Trump aside (she has rightly apologized) I recall Scalia was pretty outspoken on his personal views. Everyone has their personal views but they can still do their job.

Bullshit. The liberals on the Supreme Court have overwhelmingly proven that they ignore the U.S. Constitution and their jobs in favor of pushing their own personal agenda. It's so obvious and outrageous that no honest person could deny it.

 

[P@triot]

Isn't SCOTUS, how it is staffed and operates part of the Constitution?

Sadly no. It should be. But thanks to liberals - who hate the U.S. Constitution - it's not. For instance, no where in the U.S. Constitution does it grant the Supreme Court the power to decide or "interpret" what the Constitution itself says. And yet that's what they do all the time. Like deciding what our 2nd Amendment rights mean.

 

[bodecea]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

Psst. The Supreme Court is established BY the Constitution.


You're welcome.

 

[P@triot]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

So you oppose the Court being 'stacked' with conservatives. Interesting.

I oppose the court appointing anyone who refuses to accept the U.S. Constitution exactly as it is written and instead makes rulings based on their own agenda.

That is why Antonin Scalia was the greatest justice of our lifetime. He read the U.S. Constitution and he accepted it exactly as it was written (just as our founders intended). And he never once made a ruling based on what he wanted. He set aside his own personal views and ruled by what the document said.

 

[P@triot]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

Psst. The Supreme Court is established BY the Constitution.


You're welcome.

Psst....you have no clue what the Constitution says. You've never read it.

You're welcome.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

So you oppose the Court being 'stacked' with conservatives. Interesting.

I oppose the court appointing anyone who refuses to accept the U.S. Constitution exactly as it is written and instead makes rulings based on their own agenda.

That is why Antonin Scalia was the greatest justice of our lifetime. He read the U.S. Constitution and he accepted it exactly as it was written (just as our founders intended). And he never once made a ruling based on what he wanted. He set aside his own personal views and ruled by what the document said.

And who would be the arbiter of whether or not a judge accepts the Constitution according to your dictates?

Scalia helped put Bush in the Whitehouse. I'm SURE that's what he wanted.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Isn't SCOTUS, how it is staffed and operates part of the Constitution?

Sadly no. It should be. But thanks to liberals - who hate the U.S. Constitution - it's not. For instance, no where in the U.S. Constitution does it grant the Supreme Court the power to decide or "interpret" what the Constitution itself says. And yet that's what they do all the time. Like deciding what our 2nd Amendment rights mean.

The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution grants the Federal government the power to overturn unconstitutional laws. That power is exercised through the Supreme Court.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Conservatives are always railing against people who attack the constitution, but they regularly call for the Supreme Court to be disbanded. It's crazy stuff.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

Psst. The Supreme Court is established BY the Constitution.


You're welcome.

Psst....you have no clue what the Constitution says. You've never read it.

You're welcome.

Why should you get a say in what the Constitution says, and not me?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives are always railing against people who attack the constitution, but they regularly call for the Supreme Court to be disbanded. It's crazy stuff.

They are so delusional they think the Constitution is simply supposed to reflect the rightwing partisan agenda down to the letter.

 

[alang1216]

Bullshit. The liberals on the Supreme Court have overwhelmingly proven that they ignore the U.S. Constitution and their jobs in favor of pushing their own personal agenda. It's so obvious and outrageous that no honest person could deny it.

I don't intend to debate the 2nd amendment here, I'll only say that the SC never before EXPLICITLY stated it was a personal right.

When a conservative justice votes in favor of a conservative case that's OK but when a liberal justice does the same that's pushing their own personal agenda and dishonest? I think you have a double standard at work here.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

So you oppose the Court being 'stacked' with conservatives. Interesting.

I oppose the court appointing anyone who refuses to accept the U.S. Constitution exactly as it is written and instead makes rulings based on their own agenda.

That is why Antonin Scalia was the greatest justice of our lifetime. He read the U.S. Constitution and he accepted it exactly as it was written (just as our founders intended). And he never once made a ruling based on what he wanted. He set aside his own personal views and ruled by what the document said.

And what rulings do you agree with that were in conflict with your personal views?

 

[Syriusly]

Isn't SCOTUS, how it is staffed and operates part of the Constitution?

Sadly no. It should be. But thanks to liberals - who hate the U.S. Constitution - it's not. For instance, no where in the U.S. Constitution does it grant the Supreme Court the power to decide or "interpret" what the Constitution itself says. And yet that's what they do all the time. Like deciding what our 2nd Amendment rights mean.

So you think if a State passes a law banning private gun ownership- the Supreme Court does not have the authority to rule that State law unconstitutional?

 

[P@triot]

And who would be the arbiter of whether or not a judge accepts the Constitution according to your dictates?

That's as dumb as saying "who would be the arbiter of deciding that

Isn't SCOTUS, how it is staffed and operates part of the Constitution?

Sadly no. It should be. But thanks to liberals - who hate the U.S. Constitution - it's not. For instance, no where in the U.S. Constitution does it grant the Supreme Court the power to decide or "interpret" what the Constitution itself says. And yet that's what they do all the time. Like deciding what our 2nd Amendment rights mean.

So you think if a State passes a law banning private gun ownership- the Supreme Court does not have the authority to rule that State law unconstitutional?

Of course they do. That's why they exist genius. To rule on laws created by Congress, states, local municipalities, etc. Not to rule on the Constitution itself. Nowhere in the Constitution does it grant the Supreme Court to "interpret" the Constitution because there is nothing to "interpret". It says exactly what it says and it means exactly what it means. It was written in black and white and signed into law. You would never argue that the speed limit is "open to the interpretation" of the driver or that rape laws are "open to interpretation" of the rapist. The Constitution is no different. It was signed into law and it not "open to interpretation". That is just a desperate liberal narrative to circumvent the law.

 

[P@triot]

The Constitution legally restricts the communist desires of the liberal ideology - and they know it. However, if they can stack the Supreme Court with like-minded communists that ignore the Constitution, and the proclaim that the Supreme Court is the highest law in the land instead of the U.S. Constitution, then they can achieve their highly illegal desires.

This article illustrates why the left pushed the false narrative that the only thing that matters is the Supreme Court. Because they can place liberals like Ginsburg who intentionally ignore the Constitution and serve as political activists from the bench.

Liberals are shocked — shocked! — that Ginsburg would act like a hack

So you oppose the Court being 'stacked' with conservatives. Interesting.

I oppose the court appointing anyone who refuses to accept the U.S. Constitution exactly as it is written and instead makes rulings based on their own agenda.

That is why Antonin Scalia was the greatest justice of our lifetime. He read the U.S. Constitution and he accepted it exactly as it was written (just as our founders intended). And he never once made a ruling based on what he wanted. He set aside his own personal views and ruled by what the document said.

And what rulings do you agree with that were in conflict with your personal views?

The most obvious one is Obamacare. The federal government has 18 enumerated powers and not one of them is healthcare. In addition - not one of them grants the federal government the power to force citizens to purchase a good or service.

It was an egregious violation of the U.S. Constitution. And yes - I realize that Justice Roberts was just as guilty as Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagen. It doesn't matter who appointed the justice. Any of them that intentionally ignores the Constitution in order to push their agenda or the agenda of their party is violating their oath and should be removed from the bench (and probably charged as well).