Thread: Has a liberal Supreme Court Justice ever turned conservative?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Woodland Park, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    8,563
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    That is a circular argument. You are saying that bar is arrest and after arrest, nothing is unreasonable. If that were the case, nothing is unreasonable, period. All that is required is arrest.



    I think that argument was lost with Atwater v City of Lago Vista. Arrest is very, very easy.

    On a side note, that decision was during that time after Bush v Gore where the Court mixed things up a bit to get rid of the partisan taint. Souter actually wrote that one.



    I am not really arguing whether the arrest was warranted (so to speak). I believe you are correct and the officers were in the right. This is more of an ideological enigma for me. I am looking at what I consider a conservative position, limits on the action of the State, and seeing the so-called conservative wing of the Court refusing to place any reasonable limit on the State when it comes to police powers.
    I rarely agree with you, but this is one time where I believe you to be correct. Karma to you.
    Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.
    C. S. Lewis
    Do not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives. (Are you listening Barry)?:mad:
    Ayn Rand
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,787

    "It may well be stupid, but if it's stupid, pass a law!" he said. "Don't think the originalist interpretation constrains you. To the contrary. My Constitution is a very flexible Constitution. You want a right to abortion? Create it the way all rights are created in a democracy, pass a law. The death penalty? Pass a law. That's flexibility."
    That is interesting considering they are now deliberating on striking down a law that was passed.

    I wonder if he will remain consistent in this or find "flexibility" in his ideology.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,553
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    That is a circular argument. You are saying that bar is arrest and after arrest, nothing is unreasonable. If that were the case, nothing is unreasonable, period. All that is required is arrest.
    I have to admit that you have a point there.
    Olde-style, states' rights conservative. Ask if this concept confuses you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    That is interesting considering they are now deliberating on striking down a law that was passed.

    I wonder if he will remain consistent in this or find "flexibility" in his ideology.
    The law that needs to be changed is the commerce clause. Then they can attempt this. First one then the other. Not the other way around.
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member Zeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Tiny Redneck town in Texas
    Posts
    2,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    That is interesting considering they are now deliberating on striking down a law that was passed.

    I wonder if he will remain consistent in this or find "flexibility" in his ideology.
    They are deliberating on the constitutionality of the law not the stupidity of the law.
    The 21st century. The age of Smart phones and Stupid people.

    It is said that branches draw their life from the vine. Each is separate yet all are one as they share one life giving stem . The Bible tells us we are called to a similar union in life, our lives with the life of God. We are incorporated into him; made sharers in his life. Apart from this union we can do nothing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,787
    "[F]lexibility" appears to be in vogue.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member Janice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern USA
    Posts
    2,809

    Separate but co-equal.. unless of course, you disagree with me

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeus View Post
    They are deliberating on the constitutionality of the law not the stupidity of the law.
    This is why we used to have 3 co-equal branches of govt. First he over-rides the people. Then he over-rides congress. Now this.
    http://i1220.photobucket.com/albums/dd445/JansGraphix/ConsUndergrd-Sig2.jpg
    Liberalism is just communism sold by the drink.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    That is a circular argument. You are saying that bar is arrest and after arrest, nothing is unreasonable. If that were the case, nothing is unreasonable, period. All that is required is arrest.
    Once somebody is in custody, they are in custody, and the state has an obligation to ensure that they are not carrying any contraband into the facility. Otherwise, anybody could seek arrest for a minor charge and smuggle weapons or drugs to other prisoners. Now, one can argue that if the original arrest was improper, then the search while in custody is invalidated and anything found cannot be used for subsequent prosecution, but if the original arrest is valid, then the search is valid. [/QUOTE]

    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    That is interesting considering they are now deliberating on striking down a law that was passed.

    I wonder if he will remain consistent in this or find "flexibility" in his ideology.
    There is nothing inconsistent in his view of the Constitution and the striking down of a law that is unconstitutional. The courts have had the power to strike down unconstitutional laws since Marbury vs. Madison. Scalia's objection is to the practice of judges creating law by pretending that their desires are enshrined in the Constitution, even if what they are imposing runs counter to the text and original intent.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    15,326
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Once somebody is in custody, they are in custody, and the state has an obligation to ensure that they are not carrying any contraband into the facility. Otherwise, anybody could seek arrest for a minor charge and smuggle weapons or drugs to other prisoners. Now, one can argue that if the original arrest was improper, then the search while in custody is invalidated and anything found cannot be used for subsequent prosecution, but if the original arrest is valid, then the search is valid.


    [/QUOTE]
    Yo yo has obviously never worked in a prison. We have this issue all the time and have full authority to search any inmate at any time. Oddly enough, the only thing we have to get special permission to do is do urine tests which either have to have probable cause or have to be what they call randoms. Visits present a whole other problem.
    "Inequality is a false notion propagated by those who are made to feel guilty for what they have by those who are jealous for what they don't"-Former MTV Host Kennedy
    Reply With Quote  
     

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
  •