Posted on 06/26/2007 4:04:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
I just want a guy that bases his rulings on what the constitution actually says rather than what impact the ruling would have.
We have a means to amend the constitution so whatever impact the ruling would have shouldn't come into play. If the impact is that bad for the country then the constitution can be amended.
For example, Scalia and Rhenquist would often base 4th amendment decisions on whether their ruling would make the jobs of law enforcement easier or harder. This is totally irrelevant - the only thing that matters is the constitution.
Do you think that is too much to ask of a supreme court justice?
I think that if we have two more appointed like these, America will be returned to Conservative principles. I already see reversal of years of commie influence!
LLS
I gotta repeat what I saw in another post on this forum some time ago: Since the two parties we have are the Evil Party and the Stupid Party, "bipartisan" denotes something that is both evil AND stupid.
I want to scream every time I see a poster that thinks this was some kind of victory for the First Amendment. It wasn't, for one simple reason: Roberts and Alito once again wimped out and didn't follow the lead of Scalia. They ended up to the Left of Justice Kennedy on this ruling. Bleh.
Brilliant!
New tagline...
Note, I didn’t make it up. But I sure mean to propagate it.
Happy to help.
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.