Posted on 03/19/2024 12:35:33 PM PDT by Twotone
The court was under Leftest majority for decades. We didn’t like it, but that’s
the way things go. We hoped for improvement, and improvement finally took
place.
Now the Leftists are just melting down because they can’t control things
in perpetuity.
Boo hoo…
NO DOCTOR will allow his patient to die because of the law against abortion. Doctors WILL and HAVE let people die because of vaccination status, mainly for Covid.
Another poster child on why Article III is a mistake. Hamilton’s diarrhea defending what Robert Yates pointed out should have been ignored based on historical events by those that ratified. At least put a lot of checks/balances in that checks SCOTUS’ opinions plus screw the Congress courts’ (Appeals) and choke off the volume. Keep the power local so you can pressure the reps/judges directly, including where they live with tar/feathers at the ready.
Breyer hates the constitution and now he is trying to sell a book.
I remember that closet leftist David Souter. He was one of the main proponents in a NE case of property confiscation of private property by local governments. Mainly, the case involve a developer who bribed local government to condemn the property (very valuable for resort building) and made the owner sell it cheaply.
I heard years later when Souter retired he had the same thing pulled on him. Karma with a big K.
What makes Breyer think his rulings were golden? Most of his ruling have proven to be rather brown in reality, and I am not referring to skin color with my choice of color choice.
“Basically, he’s saying that originalists like Thomas aren’t historians any more than Ketanji is a biologist and, thus, can’t be originalists. He’s also saying that our changing society needs an ever changing constitution...”
If the Founding Fathers had intended for a “living Constitution” reactive to the whims of the majority at a given moment they would not have expressly stipulated the amendment process for altering it.
Don’t care. Glad you’re gone.
Die already.
Sounds like the “esteemed” gentleman has contracted yet another case of rectal syphilis.
If it can mean whatever you want, it means nothing. Wonder why there haven’t been any pushes to create new Amendments?
Truer words were never spoken! 👍🏼
These hack Justices treat the Constitution as a 1970’s “mood ring.”
Given that this guy is not an active judge or Justice, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass what he thinks. It does seem quite evident that he is very bitter, almost like old man Biden screaming at the clouds, though clearly this one at least has some of his mind intact. Not his moral values, I would point out, but his mind.
A specious argument. Abortion has always been allowed when the mother’s life is endangered. Never ever in this country has a woman been told that she must carry a pregnancy when it might lead to her death or permanent damage to her health. That is medical malpractice and always has been.
Yep - technology advances.
Human nature hasn’t changed one iota in 5000 years. Anytime you hear some assclown quack on the TV talking about the constitution being “outdated” or “archaic” you can rest assured their intentions are not specifically too good.
Sorry Stevie, it is a contract between the states and the federal government they created. You have to read what the contract says and decide based on that text. Not what you wish it said. Your use of ‘pragmatism’ sounds like ‘fabulist’. Stick to the text, not your perverted wishes when deciding cases. Oh, that’s right, you didn’t when you were sitting on the bench.
“pragmatism” is a vague, self-congratulatory euphemism for “ judgement call”. How Breyer doesn’t see that the Supreme Court is not the place to air one’s “pragmatic’ grievances, really baffles me. It’s there precisely to oversee the constitutionality of government’s purported “ pragmatism,”
The Constitution is actually a very simple document and not difficult to interpret. It is mostly a document outlining individual rights of citizens, and states. It is also very specific about outlining restrictions of the Federal Government.
When the Constitution was written it was a document that allowed much sovereignty to the individual states. If it was not such the individual states would not have agreed to join it as a new nation, “The United States of America.”
Our Federal Government today is a monster that methodically denies the rights of individual states. Abortion is a perfect example. I abhor abortion. I also recognize abortion is not mentioned in The Constitution as a right. Thus laws on abortion are up to the individual states. It is that simple. As much as I abhor abortion I will support California and New York etc. in allowing it as this is a state function and not federal. Thus I am supporting The Constitution as written. The logic of the right to abortion in Roe v Wade was insane. It was based on the “right to privacy.” Via this logic if I murder someone in my home it is okay due to my right to privacy? That ruling was judicial activism contrary to the constitution and now is dead. Fortunately in Texas we are not insane.
This guy is a militant old leftist loon. It doesn’t require you to be a historian. It simply requires you to read and understand. And if a law needs to be changed or updated or removed; that’s up to Congress; not some sad pinko in a black robe. Go away you old turd.
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.