Posted on 04/19/2005 8:37:21 PM PDT by kingattax
I don't see anything intrinsically wrong with doing research on the net. kennedy stands convicted in my book for the late ruling re: applying capital punishment to sub18 murderers. of the three bases he cites for his ruling, only the consultation of foreign opinion is not utterly spurious... and that one is against the law.
The worst are Souter and Ginsberg--people who must have received a law degree as a cereal box prize. Party line and politically correct to the max (Souter must have hidden his socialist democrat dreams of utopia). He's out now and has been screwing with the constitution since his appointment. Ginsberg never hid the fact she was more dedicated to the latest whim of liberal chic than anything produced by our founders.
There oughta be a way to retire these imbeciles.
Wow. That's some website.
I'd comment more on it, but I guess I'm too mindless and stupid.
Effective at what?
In addition to Westlaw and Lexis, there is an enormous amount of legal research that can be done through the internet.
Virtually every state and federal court procedural and evidentiary rule is available, as are federal and state regulations from securities to land use; almost every state and federal court opinion is available without accessing West or Lex; briefs and pleadings in state and federal appellate courts can be accessed; every arbitration body posts its rules and decisions on the internet (AAA, NASD, NYSE, etc); law reviews from practically every law school in the nation are accessible, as are state and national bar journals; legislative debates, commentaries, and proposals are accessible; etc. etc.
Rep. Delay's shock at a Justice doing his own research on the internet is just bizarre. Is he also shocked that most of the Justices on the Supreme Court also do their own drafting?
Do you have any examples of their outrageous opinions?
"i dont need to be a "lawyer" to know kennedy is on a dangeous road with the "international opinion" BS as a predicate for his majority opinion."
Oh, I wish Kennedy would can it with the international legal stuff. But the fact is, when a federalism issue comes before the court, I know Kennedy is a reliable vote.
Also, it would be a real mistake to start impeaching judges. Right now, we are filling the courts with conservative judges. I also know politics tend to be cyclical, so that the Democrats will control something eventually. When that day comes, I intend to defend the independence of the judiciary as a bulwark against them. What I don't want to see is a case where every time there is a new Congress or President, all the judges get impeached and replaced. Better to have the occasional oddball opinion then to destabilize the very judiciary which we are taking control of.
Moderates are by nature not risk takers or willing to do what needs to be done.
Guys like Delay, while he may not be the most articulate fellow, is willing to walk the point.
My view is that the courts, and Kennedy in particular, are enamored with how easy it is to grab power never assigned to them by the Constitution and they are in need of a serious wakeup call.
If Tom Delay is the only man willing to take Kennedy and friends on, then so be it. The SCOTUS is bound, except for treaties, by the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution and the statutes passed by Congress. Kennedy and friends by citing precedent from other countries, not relative to treaties, have de facto made those precedents authoritarian in United States jurisprudence. That is a violation of the law, the Constitution and their sworn oaths and it is high time somebody shoved it in their face.
I would prefer it to be somebody who could make a better argument but since those folks are hidden behind the curtain, Tom Delay will do just fine.
On planet Leftune maybe, on planet Earth he is an overly strong central government type as evidenced by his poetic musings in Lawrence v Texas, his nonsense in Roper v Simmons vis a vis juvenile murderers and his support of Roe.
Yeah, Kennedy is a real big state power guy alright.
IMHO, Soros' plan, or gambit, required Getting DeLay to enable the Left to intimidate conservatives with impunity. Soros' gambit failed after he repeated the same mistake of overestimating Olde Media clout.
Some of the justices need to be impeached. They gave an oath, yet are openly violating it by rejecting the Constitution in favor of what in their opinion is international opinion.
It is not hard to find examples of the absurd rulings by rogue judges. Judges Greer of Florida, for examples, has already set himself up as an absolute ruler. Unless something is done, we will end up with a dictatorship of judges. It has already gone too far where the Supreme Court even declared that porn has to be legal.
I don't have a problem with the goals, depending on the details, but the problem is, I don't think DeLay can drive this bus all the way home. I think he overestimates his own standing with the public, and underestimates his own weakness, and that makes it all too easy for the Dems to kill the movement by cutting off its head. Hubris is a dangerous thing, and Tommy's got it in spades.
Justice Kennedy when you follow international law and not our written constitution....THAT'S AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE!!! IMPEACH THE BAST*ARD!!!
Back then Olde Media's clout enabled the Left to Get Newt because politicians went along with Olde Media to get along. New Media changes the political paradigm for politicians on both sides of the aisle. They don't know iff'n to smile, spit or swallow.
9:43 AM ......no court this morning, "counselor" ?
Huh? This article says it's unusual for a congresscritter to single out a justice for critisism? What was Searchlight Harry Reid doing when he slammed Justice Thomas? I don't recall a great amount of hand wringing over his vile remarks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.