My prediction........
Posted on 03/15/2011 5:10:30 PM PDT by PROCON
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
...............
My prediction........
Has Michael Bloomberg met Michael Bloomberg? ;)
Il Doofus!
Usual democrat hypocrisy:
Be against it when it doesn’t favor them, support it to the death when it does.
Literally they don’t have either original or appellate jurisdiction if the matter is not under the Federal Constitution.
But as they have usurped to themselves the ability to define what is and is not under the Constitution. Their original and appellate jurisdiction is absolutely endless.
Yes this is laughable upon simple examination in respect to the arrogant claim that we live under a Constitution. The truth is we do not live under a Constitution of any kind, we live under 9 hand picked Oligarchs in black robes.
There are numerous cases in which theses Oligarchs demonstrate and redistribute this fact. Roe V. Wade being among the most commonly sited, but by no means the first nor the last.
You see a true Constitutional system is designed with checks and balances to enforce its limits, precisely because its authors expected its members to try and assume boundless power.
Therefore the the game was not to trust them not to do otherwise, but to keep them from practically achieving the same boundless power. The only possible way to do that is by creating and empowering other forces to challenge them and deny them that arbitrary authority.
It is common in school to just speak of the 3 branches, but the 3 branches are really just 3 aspects of the same goverment, worse still by original design 2 of the branches was to be effectually appointed and/or approved by 1 of them congress.
The presidency was expected to be chosen by congress(Nobody thought that most presidents would win more then 50% of the collage). The court was hand picked by the same president and approved by the Senate.
.
Amazing -
An 0pansy’s early car was a VW Bug
Then he discovered OPM
.
Do you really believe Obammie the Chicago-thug Commie does not have his minions spreading intimidation in any form that will help him push his communist agenda?
Tsk, tsk. I’m surprised that you have that much faith in the scumbags that currently chuckle about farting in the Oval Office.
I have no doubt that Obama’s people are spreading intimidation in any way they can. All I’m saying is that this particular incident is not an example of that intimidation. Filing a legal brief (in response to a legal brief filed by the opposing side of a lawsuit) is not intimidation, and is not improper.
Yes, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. However, that does not mean the court must exercise its original jurisdiction (and, in practice, the court rarely exercises original jurisdiction). And that’s not even relevant here, since neither party has asked the court to take the case that way. The case has already been heard at the district level. The plaintiffs have asked the Supreme Court to take the case, on appeal, before it is heard at the circuit level. Obama, as a party to the lawsuit, is asking them not to do so. Original jurisdiction has nothing to do with this.
It may that is its WE who have the rude awakening coming. The American people never cease fooling themselves, and that includes Reublican primary voters.
I was stunned to read this week that only 11 percent of Americans endorse the "communist agenda".
Most people probably don’t know what they are.
The leftists in academe, the media, the churches and theological seminaries have done such a great job of disguising the communist agenda under a variety of feel-good movements, that communism is mainstream to most.
Pretty sad.
THEY ALL drank the cool aid and some of them played fainting at rallies, hmmm!!!
I keep seeing this excuse all over this forum. The Court doesn't have to take any case, I guess, but they certainly should take this one, unless they intend to let ObamaCare be fully implemented before they take it up.
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.