FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 06/26/2015 8:06:38 AM PDT by xzins
Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact— and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves
Not a threat, a fait accompli.
I’m thinking Scalia might do us all a bigger favor by leaving the Court and writing a tell-all book about what really goes on in there.
The least legitimate of the three branches of government is going to be the one to bring down the country. What have we done?!
I would suggest we dissolve our system of government and start over, but there’s no system that can protect us from the self-destruction of liberalism.
A Piece of Paper?
Rogue Court
It’s not 9 but 5.
Perhaps it should be a two thirds majority decision?
Voted for lesser evil and got greater evil for the trouble. Just as predicted.
The other two branches are all-in
This is a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government.
A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
I am a lawyer and I truly hate my profession. The High Court is a sad, outdated joke. To hell with what the states vote for. To hell with thousands of years of tradition. Fagdom owns the SCROTUS.
Is there a reason not to immediately push for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman?
if we did as you say then we might become a communist nation. When you say “we” keep in mind that “we” conservatives can’t even run the Republican Party much less the country.
They will be on much firmer ground than the gay marriage people, being able to point that polygamous marriage is recognized in many (Muslim) countries around the world, and for the US to refuse to recognize polygamous marriages legally performed overseas is discriminatory.
After that will be lawsuits striking down age limits on marriage. A marriage between a 40 year old man and a 10 year old girl, legally performed in Saudi, must be recognized in the US, otherwise it is discriminatory.
The slippery slope is now greased.
Ignore them is what I would do. Put me in prison or shoot me for my beliefs. It wouldn’t be the first time in history that has happened. Those ‘libertarians’ who declared that gay marriage doesn’t hurt anyone else will soon find out how wrong they are. Just ask the bakers and photographers who are losing their businesses, and clergy who will now be forced to participate in these ‘weddings’ or see their churches shut down for hate crimes. This will not end with the gays. Other groups are already lined up for their turn to be validated. I am grossly sickened today.
For the last 7 years, we’ve been nothing but subjects that are to be ruled.
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.