Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1 High-Stakes Courts 
    HR Corporate Scum patriot45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Plant City, Florida
    Posts
    10,892
    Thomas Sowell reminds us why sitting out this vote will be a bad thng.


    Vote



    Recent landmark court decisions are reminders that elections are not just about putting candidates in office for a few years.

    The judges that elected officials put on the bench can remake the legal landscape, change fundamental social policies and even affect the way wars are fought, long after those who appointed them have served their terms and passed from the scene.

    The Supreme Court recently created a new "right" out of thin air for captured enemy soldiers and terrorists-- the right to seek release in the federal courts, something that neither the Constitution nor the Geneva Convention provided.

    The High Court has also struck down gun control laws as violations of the Second Amendment. Whatever the legal merits or the policy merits of that decision, it is a major change, created by judges.

    The point here is that federal judges, including Supreme Court justices, wield enormous-- and growing-- power. What that means is that when we vote for the candidates who will nominate and confirm judges, we are making decisions not only for ourselves but for generations yet unborn.

    Recent momentous decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court have been decided by 5 to 4 votes, including the votes of justices appointed by presidents who are no longer living-- Justice John Paul Stevens, appointed by President Ford, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, appointed by President Reagan.

    Whoever is elected to the White House this November is expected to appoint two or three new members of the Supreme Court-- justices who will be making major decisions affecting the future of American society, long after that president is gone.

    Your children will be living during the lifetime tenure of those justices, and your grandchildren will be living in a world shaped by the precedents that those justices set.

    In a year when dissatisfaction has been expressed by both Democrats and Republicans with the presidential candidates chosen by their own parties, it is worth keeping in mind the high stakes involved in judicial appointments-- and therefore in presidential elections.

    This is especially important to be kept in mind by voters who are thinking of venting their frustrations by voting for some third-party candidate that they know has no chance of being elected.

    There will be a president chosen this November, and he will appoint Supreme Court justices during his term, regardless of whether you stay home or go to the polls. Continued

    : “Grow your own dope. Plant a liberal.”
    ” Obummercare, 20 percent of the time it works everytime.
     

  2. #2  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas aren't going anywhere for a while. Kennedy will probably remain for at least 4 more years, at 8 years retirement looks more likely.

    Stevens will likely have to be replaced in the next 4 years, he's 88 now. Ginsburg is 75. Breyer and Souter are 70 and 69, respectively, about the same as Kennedy.

    If the Messiah gets elected, will the court shift liberal? Probably not. But if McCain gets elected, he has a very good chance to shift our legal policy towards the Conservative for the next 20-years. The issue on the courts is this: do you want the Court to stay deadlocked with Kennedy providing a swing vote for the next 8 years, or do you want the Court to be solidly Conservative?

    With Ginsburg or Stevens replaced, the liberals would need Kennedy to even get a liberal issue on the docket. With both replaced, the Conservatives will control both what cases are heard and what conclusions are reached. Very powerful.
     

  3. #3  
    Eyelids
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by biccat View Post
    With both replaced, the Conservatives will control both what cases are heard and what conclusions are reached. Very powerful.
    Thats not a good thing at all and I would feel the same way if it were liberals controlling the Supreme Court.
     

  4. #4  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Eyelids View Post
    Thats not a good thing at all and I would feel the same way if it were liberals controlling the Supreme Court.
    That's how the rules work.

    90% of winning an argument is controlling how the question is presented. If the issue of abortion comes before the court, liberal justices would want a woman who was raped and impregnated to issue a broad ruling for abortion. Conservative justices would want a woman who underwent artificial insemination, caused another woman not to receive treatment, and terminated her child during labor to issue a broad ruling against abortion.

    The factual background for a case, while not technically at issue before the court, will sway public opinion on a case and help justices rationalize their decision to the public.
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,421
    Quote Originally Posted by biccat View Post
    Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas aren't going anywhere for a while. Kennedy will probably remain for at least 4 more years, at 8 years retirement looks more likely.

    Stevens will likely have to be replaced in the next 4 years, he's 88 now. Ginsburg is 75. Breyer and Souter are 70 and 69, respectively, about the same as Kennedy.

    If the Messiah gets elected, will the court shift liberal? Probably not. But if McCain gets elected, he has a very good chance to shift our legal policy towards the Conservative for the next 20-years. The issue on the courts is this: do you want the Court to stay deadlocked with Kennedy providing a swing vote for the next 8 years, or do you want the Court to be solidly Conservative?

    With Ginsburg or Stevens replaced, the liberals would need Kennedy to even get a liberal issue on the docket. With both replaced, the Conservatives will control both what cases are heard and what conclusions are reached. Very powerful.
    The Justices are also painfully aware of the impact of their retirements and may very well attempt to time same so as to coincide with the prospect of having their replacement chosen by an Executive that is more likely to choose a kindred Justice.
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Constitutionally Speaking's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,301
    Quote Originally Posted by biccat View Post
    Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas aren't going anywhere for a while. Kennedy will probably remain for at least 4 more years, at 8 years retirement looks more likely.

    Stevens will likely have to be replaced in the next 4 years, he's 88 now. Ginsburg is 75. Breyer and Souter are 70 and 69, respectively, about the same as Kennedy.

    If the Messiah gets elected, will the court shift liberal? Probably not. But if McCain gets elected, he has a very good chance to shift our legal policy towards the Conservative for the next 20-years. The issue on the courts is this: do you want the Court to stay deadlocked with Kennedy providing a swing vote for the next 8 years, or do you want the Court to be solidly Conservative?



    Exactly!

    Will the court shift liberal??? No, but it will stay liberal for decades - setting all kinds of devastating precedents.


    With Ginsburg or Stevens replaced, the liberals would need Kennedy to even get a liberal issue on the docket. With both replaced, the Conservatives will control both what cases are heard and what conclusions are reached. Very powerful.

    You absolutely nailed it .
     

  7. #7  
    Patent Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    1,784
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillygirl View Post
    The Justices are also painfully aware of the impact of their retirements and may very well attempt to time same so as to coincide with the prospect of having their replacement chosen by an Executive that is more likely to choose a kindred Justice.
    Ginsburg and Stevens have been rumored to be looking at retiring, but they are waiting for President Bush to leave office.

    If McCain gets elected I don't see them waiting around for a 2012 or 2016 election, especially if McCain picks a good VP who would have a good shot in those elections. I don't wish ill on Justice Stevens, but I would be surprised if he lives to see the 2012 presidential election.
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •