All tits and no brains
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 03:58 last edited by
Orders reissued (BTW, the original court ruling was 7-0)...
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 11:34 last edited by
@Jolly said in All tits and no brains:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-rules-against-whitmer-cnn
Right here is the problem, and it's not confined to Michigan:
"Michiganders have an opportunity to weigh in on our Supreme Court," she said. "We've got to have justices who do the right thing."
I would think that the right thing would be to have justices that FOLLOW THE LAW, rather than act as some kind of super-legislature, accountable to no one.
The law seems pretty clear, according to the article:
The court ruled 4-3 that Whitmer's decision to declare a state of emergency without approval from state legislators was unconstitutional, citing the 1976 Emergency Management Act, which states that "after 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order ... declaring the state of disaster terminated" or request an extension.
So, Madam(e) Governor, are you going to request an extension? If not, why not?
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 11:42 last edited by
Have the legislature change the law.
Seems pretty simple to me...
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 11:50 last edited by
@Jolly said in All tits and no brains:
Have the legislature change the law.
Seems pretty simple to me...
Surely she'd sign it, amirite?
-
@Jolly said in All tits and no brains:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-rules-against-whitmer-cnn
Right here is the problem, and it's not confined to Michigan:
"Michiganders have an opportunity to weigh in on our Supreme Court," she said. "We've got to have justices who do the right thing."
I would think that the right thing would be to have justices that FOLLOW THE LAW, rather than act as some kind of super-legislature, accountable to no one.
The law seems pretty clear, according to the article:
The court ruled 4-3 that Whitmer's decision to declare a state of emergency without approval from state legislators was unconstitutional, citing the 1976 Emergency Management Act, which states that "after 28 days, the governor shall issue an executive order ... declaring the state of disaster terminated" or request an extension.
So, Madam(e) Governor, are you going to request an extension? If not, why not?
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 13:22 last edited by@George-K said in All tits and no brains:
I would think that the right thing would be to have justices that FOLLOW THE LAW, rather than act as some kind of super-legislature, accountable to no one.
Exactly!!!!! When President a Trump and VP Biden say they will only nominate judges who act a certain way, that is just wrong!!!!
Also, I am always surprised that judges in the US for lower courts are always attached to a party. Does not make sense to me. For me, judges should be “party less”
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 13:47 last edited by
So you'll better understand this, bear in mind that while they both say that, what they mean by it is totally the opposite of the other one. When Biden, or any democrat, says they will pick a nominee who will vote a certain way, he means he will pick people who will follow the democrat agenda. When Trump says the same thing, he means he will pick people who will follow the law.
-
So you'll better understand this, bear in mind that while they both say that, what they mean by it is totally the opposite of the other one. When Biden, or any democrat, says they will pick a nominee who will vote a certain way, he means he will pick people who will follow the democrat agenda. When Trump says the same thing, he means he will pick people who will follow the law.
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 13:56 last edited by@Larry said in All tits and no brains:
So you'll better understand this, bear in mind that while they both say that, what they mean by it is totally the opposite of the other one. When Biden, or any democrat, says they will pick a nominee who will vote a certain way, he means he will pick people who will follow the democrat agenda. When Trump says the same thing, he means he will pick people who will follow the law.
Sorry Larry. What is the law right now regarding abortion? You may not like it. I may not like it. But, it is currently the law. Correct?
This is from the 2016 President debates.
President Trump
Well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that’s really what’s going to be — that will happen,” Trump said during that October debate. “And that’ll happen automatically, in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court. -
@Larry said in All tits and no brains:
So you'll better understand this, bear in mind that while they both say that, what they mean by it is totally the opposite of the other one. When Biden, or any democrat, says they will pick a nominee who will vote a certain way, he means he will pick people who will follow the democrat agenda. When Trump says the same thing, he means he will pick people who will follow the law.
Sorry Larry. What is the law right now regarding abortion? You may not like it. I may not like it. But, it is currently the law. Correct?
This is from the 2016 President debates.
President Trump
Well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that’s really what’s going to be — that will happen,” Trump said during that October debate. “And that’ll happen automatically, in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court.wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 14:01 last edited by@taiwan_girl said in All tits and no brains:
@Larry said in All tits and no brains:
So you'll better understand this, bear in mind that while they both say that, what they mean by it is totally the opposite of the other one. When Biden, or any democrat, says they will pick a nominee who will vote a certain way, he means he will pick people who will follow the democrat agenda. When Trump says the same thing, he means he will pick people who will follow the law.
Sorry Larry. What is the law right now regarding abortion? You may not like it. I may not like it. But, it is currently the law. Correct?
This is from the 2016 President debates.
President Trump
Well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that’s really what’s going to be — that will happen,” Trump said during that October debate. “And that’ll happen automatically, in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court.Sorry TG, but the law in question here is a result of past justices NOT following the law.
-
@taiwan_girl said in All tits and no brains:
@Larry said in All tits and no brains:
So you'll better understand this, bear in mind that while they both say that, what they mean by it is totally the opposite of the other one. When Biden, or any democrat, says they will pick a nominee who will vote a certain way, he means he will pick people who will follow the democrat agenda. When Trump says the same thing, he means he will pick people who will follow the law.
Sorry Larry. What is the law right now regarding abortion? You may not like it. I may not like it. But, it is currently the law. Correct?
This is from the 2016 President debates.
President Trump
Well, if we put another two or perhaps three justices on, that’s really what’s going to be — that will happen,” Trump said during that October debate. “And that’ll happen automatically, in my opinion, because I am putting pro-life justices on the court.Sorry TG, but the law in question here is a result of past justices NOT following the law.
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 14:06 last edited by@Larry and how do you know that?
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 14:07 last edited by
Because I've taken the time to educate myself on the issue.
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 14:21 last edited by
@Larry and the Supreme Court justices didnt?
-
wrote on 6 Oct 2020, 14:32 last edited by
Obviously not, since they made a ruling that wasn't constitutional.