What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Will It Be Cass Sunstein Or Another Radical

AquaAthena

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
16,768
Reaction score
13,800
Points
2,415
Location
Central Coast
For Supreme Court Justice? I fear it has been a plan all along and Stevens vacating now, was just stage one. I hope I am wrong and that the nominee will not be Czar Sunstein. It would please the Left, and doom the rest.


CZAR WARS

Sunstein: "Obama, not courts, should interpret law
'Beliefs and commitments' of nation's leader should supersede judges"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 18, 2009
12:10 am Eastern

By Aaron Klein
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Cass Sunstein

JERUSALEM – The interpretation of federal law should be made not by judges but by the beliefs and commitments of the U.S. president and those around him, according to President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein.

"There is no reason to believe that in the face of statutory ambiguity, the meaning of federal law should be settled by the inclinations and predispositions of federal judges. The outcome should instead depend on the commitments and beliefs of the President and those who operate under him," argued Sunstein.

This statement was the central thesis of Sunstein's 2006 Yale Law School paper, "Beyond Marbury: The Executive's Power to Say What the Law Is." The paper, in which he argues the president and his advisers should be the ones to interpret federal laws, was obtained and reviewed by WND.

Sunstein debated the precedent-setting 1803 case, Marbury v. Madison, which determined it is "emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."

He lamented multiple recent examples of U.S. presidents interpreting law only to have their interpretations overturned by the Supreme Court.

Get "The Audacity of Deceit," and learn about the looming hostile attack on Judeo-Christian values and feedoms Americans hold dear.

"Why is the executive not permitted to construe constitutional ambiguities as it sees fit?" asks Sunstein. "The simplest answer is that foxes are not permitted to guard henhouses ... but who is the fox?"

He concludes "the executive should usually be permitted to interpret (law) as it reasonably sees fit."

"The allocation of law-interpreting power to the executive fits admirably well with the twentieth-century shift from common law courts to regulatory administration if the governing statute is ambiguous," he writes.

Sunstein is not shy about expressing his radical beliefs in papers and books, although many of his controversial arguments have received little to no news media attention or public scrutiny.

Earlier this week, WND first reported Sunstein drew up in an academic book a "First Amendment New Deal" – a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would include the establishment of a panel of "nonpartisan experts" to ensure "diversity of view" on the airwaves.

WND also reported Sunstein proposed a radical new "bill of rights" in a 2004 book, "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR's Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever," in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state.

WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.

Much more: Sunstein: Obama, not courts, should interpret law
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,428
Reaction score
19,008
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
There's some buzz that Janet Napolitano will be considered for the Stevens spot.

Oh.The.Horror.
 

Modbert

Daydream Believer
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
33,178
Reaction score
3,050
Points
48
World Net Daily, just the viable source.

:lol:
 

Terry

Shut the $%$ Up!
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
5,222
Reaction score
1,136
Points
48
I thought and said Cass last night in a thread
 
OP
AquaAthena

AquaAthena

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2010
Messages
16,768
Reaction score
13,800
Points
2,415
Location
Central Coast
There's some buzz that Janet Napolitano will be considered for the Stevens spot.

Oh.The.Horror.

Ya` think?? Even after her remarks ater the recent airline incident? She didn't show much intellect or sound judgment there. The public will be reminded. [You surely do read fast.] :lol:
 

Modbert

Daydream Believer
Joined
Sep 2, 2008
Messages
33,178
Reaction score
3,050
Points
48
Right! I'm sure those quotes of his were taken out of context??? :lol: I should have put up some from Comedy Central, so you would consider them legit?? :lol:

Probably. Using WND as a source is the lowest source anyone can use.

Here in reality, there are already a list of potential candidates out there. Especially since anyone who knows the process of Supreme Court Nominee picks knows that those who were interviewed for the job last time but didn't get it are more likely to be called up.
 

Terry

Shut the $%$ Up!
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
5,222
Reaction score
1,136
Points
48
Health Care is too important to Obama, he will want a strong man on the bench.
 

Terry

Shut the $%$ Up!
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
5,222
Reaction score
1,136
Points
48
Right! I'm sure those quotes of his were taken out of context??? :lol: I should have put up some from Comedy Central, so you would consider them legit?? :lol:

Probably. Using WND as a source is the lowest source anyone can use.

Here in reality, there are already a list of potential candidates out there. Especially since anyone who knows the process of Supreme Court Nominee picks knows that those who were interviewed for the job last time but didn't get it are more likely to be called up.
Kind of like people using Huffington post as a source huh? :lol:
 

Avatar4321

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
82,283
Reaction score
10,123
Points
2,070
Location
Minnesota
Right! I'm sure those quotes of his were taken out of context??? :lol: I should have put up some from Comedy Central, so you would consider them legit?? :lol:

Probably. Using WND as a source is the lowest source anyone can use.

Here in reality, there are already a list of potential candidates out there. Especially since anyone who knows the process of Supreme Court Nominee picks knows that those who were interviewed for the job last time but didn't get it are more likely to be called up.

No. I think the lowest source anyone can use is probably mediamatters.
 

Polk

Classic
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
9,791
Reaction score
577
Points
138
Location
Ost
It won't be Sunstein. The base would revolt because of how conservative Sunstein is, the right would not know when to take a win and would instead shit a brick trying to figure out how to paint Sunstein as a communist.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$20.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top