Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Applying the Constitution

  1. #1

    Default Applying the Constitution

    How sad is this? There are complaints that Kavanaugh is looking to the Constitution and not precedent to rule on cases. How is this an issue when this is the only way the Supreme Court is supposed to work? It is either allowed by the Constitution or it isn't, and if it's not it's illegal.

    https://abovethelaw.com/2019/02/oh-g...n-originalist/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    4,239

    Default

    BigDaddy



    Applying the Constitution
    How sad is this? There are complaints that Kavanaugh is looking to the Constitution and not precedent to rule on cases. How is this an issue when this is the only way the Supreme Court is supposed to work? It is either allowed by the Constitution or it isn't, and if it's not it's illegal.

    https://abovethelaw.com/2019/02/oh-g...n-originalist/

    Interesting here to me....


    One must be very careful when reading precedent materials on law....or many of them are the trends of the day and not based on Constitutional intent.

    Trends which change like fashions. This is not law..but convenience/emotions...often masquerading as law... but in fat is the emotions or flavor of the day.



    Since the advent of the talk show host ...Phil Donahue ...many today and in particular the feminine and or females of this country.... which constitute about 50 per cent of the voters or more......have been raised primarily on their emotions. And Phil Donahue, and the spin off programs which followed, were heavy on what I have come to define as the "Victim Dictum Mentality/emotions."

    The Victim Dictum Mentality is where people believe that everyone is a Victim of an Unjust society....no matter that they broke the law.


    This kind of conditioning and or programming is how a nation gets turned upside down in its beliefs....and practices.....because these people become voters and serve on Juries.


    In this "Victim Dictum Mentality and or conditioning it is ones emotions which determine right or wrong...lawful or unlawful.....not what happened or the Constitutional intent...or put another way...situational ethics which can and often do change like the wind...like the flavor of the week.,.


    This is a concept for which our media..and our leadership, heavily relying on our emotional public stroking media, are heavily dependent. They do not want the public aware of this pattern.

    Or put another way....our leadership is and will be dependent on emotionally stroking the public through the media.


    And so too do these talk snows.....everyone is a victim.

    Among the worst today..I believe is this ...Dr Phil.


    I have been to the Marshall Wythe Law Library off the Colonial Parkway near Williamsburg, Virginia and have been through some of their volumes of case law....but have also been taught certain aspects of the Constitution by good teachers.


    I am also well aware of what the intent was behind Amendment 9 and 10 of the Constitution..as well as other Amendments.


    When you know certain aspect of history combined with Law.....and or are even aware of the difference in "Legal and Lawful" you can catch these television "Experts" gaslighting you on much of what is going on out here.


    The ongoing controversies around Amendment 2 as well as other Amendments are textbook of this kind of gaslighting going on continually.


    This fellow David Hogg is a 24 Carat gaslighter and is being used/misused by the deep state to "Herd" the public where the deep state wants them....by misrepresenting what 2A states...

    This was also tried years ago with Amendment 4....over and over and over...Amendment 5 as well...it is not just 2A.


    Be Warned...the "Gaslighters." Fake news and or information's.....even fake history or historical quotes...misquotes.



    Ishmaelites at work...

    They need leftist judges so that they can themselves mold...fold spindle and mutilate the Constitution to where it is "Unlimited Government" instead of "Limited Government.


    Kavanaugh is looking towards "Limited Government" by looking at original intent... not flexible folding spindling and mutilating by emotions/flavors of the day as are leftist Supreme Court Judges.


    When you hear a "Expert" even a judge say the Constitution is outdated...they are gaslighting you ...because the intent of the Constitution is and always has been "Limited Government. This is also what is behind Amendment 9&10. Limited Government.


    If you read carefully ...the first ten Amendments....to the Constitution of the United States...they are all intended as limits on Government ...not on the people.

    Be Warned the Ishmaelites in government...they are everywhere. And they work hard not to have the public catch on ....ever. To have the public remain "Dumbed Down.



    My non Ishmaelite .02,


    Orangetom
    Last edited by orangetom1999; 03-01-2019 at 12:37 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mountains & Lakes of the extreme NorthEast
    Posts
    1,832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orangetom1999 View Post
    ......One must be very careful when reading precedent materials on law....or many of them are the trends of the day and not based on Constitutional intent.

    Trends which change like fashions. This is not law........
    I think this sums it up: keep politics out of the courts and leave it to the wackos in Congress as the Constitution has divided the branches up.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Morgan County, Alabama
    Posts
    3,318

    Default

    Reliance on precedents has long been a standard practice of high courts. It's called "stare decisis:" "it has been decided." It doesn't necessarily mean the Constitution has been, or is being, ignored.
    It may be a matter that does not directly depend upon Constitional law to decide.

    But, Orangetom was right, there have been bad precedents set in some past decisions.

    One has to take this on a case by case basis.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Mountains & Lakes of the extreme NorthEast
    Posts
    1,832

    Default

    Yeah, bad precedents were set because the Constitution wasn't taken as the first consideration. I'm not going to argue this, it is all obvious.,

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    4,239

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Winni View Post
    Yeah, bad precedents were set because the Constitution wasn't taken as the first consideration. I'm not going to argue this, it is all obvious.,
    I agree with your premise here Winni....and in the Constitution taken as first consideration..is it in line with the Constitution and or the intent of the framers??



    But with a voting population raised on a television and or movie education...in emotions and not thinking ...it is not obvious.

    Remember what I said about the "Victim Dictum" today often overriding the law...?? This is not accidental but carefully cultivated...for this result..a dumbing down of America and Americans.


    This is what happened with that illegal alien found not guilty of shooting that woman on that pier in California a couple of years back. This illegal was found to be a Victim by the Jury....and therefore not guilty. Ishmaelites at work.

    Thanks,
    Orangetom

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Where no man has gone before.
    Posts
    2,219

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddy View Post
    How sad is this? There are complaints that Kavanaugh is looking to the Constitution and not precedent to rule on cases. How is this an issue when this is the only way the Supreme Court is supposed to work? It is either allowed by the Constitution or it isn't, and if it's not it's illegal.

    https://abovethelaw.com/2019/02/oh-g...n-originalist/
    Yeah, itís not exactly a completely cut and dry document. Hence the reason there are different camps of how to interpret it.

    And ATL is mostly a joke.
    Do not pray for easy lives, pray to be stronger men.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    1,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigDaddy View Post
    How sad is this? There are complaints that Kavanaugh is looking to the Constitution and not precedent to rule on cases. How is this an issue when this is the only way the Supreme Court is supposed to work? It is either allowed by the Constitution or it isn't, and if it's not it's illegal.

    https://abovethelaw.com/2019/02/oh-g...n-originalist/

    simple - The Constitution wasn't composed as ridgid/unbending/forever DIY gooberment manual >>>> WISELY written in are all kinds of avenues to change and expand laws as necessary - it's a living & breathing document - it's what makes it work to this day ....

    as far as precedent is concerned - not sure where you are reading that Kananaugh isn't doing any research - that's laughable - sounds like more liberal garbage - any decision by an individual judge to circulate amoung SCOTUS is 100% research on the basic law being interpreted >>>> THAT'S THE FREAKING JOB

    when you bitch about The Constitution's meanings being interpretated to incorporate the modern world - your AR-15 wasn't around in the 1780s .....
    Last edited by Illini Warrior; 03-02-2019 at 08:22 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    4,239

    Default

    Reliance on precedents has long been a standard practice of high courts. It's called "stare decisis:" "it has been decided." It doesn't necessarily mean the Constitution has been, or is being, ignored.
    It may be a matter that does not directly depend upon Constitional law to decide.

    But, Orangetom was right, there have been bad precedents set in some past decisions.

    One has to take this on a case by case basis.

    Tommy Gunn is correct about "Stare Decisis" and it's applicability to law and or the interpretation of the law.

    This is why, for those in the know about the Constitution, it is the intent of the framers...not a new interpretation. It helps to know some history ...which I believe is why history is such a poorly taught subject among so many today.

    And I believe, with Bret Kavanaugh, the left were so against his appointment to the bench. He would know and research and or depend too much on history and the intent of the framers from research and or records of the same. He would not be depending on modern re interpretations of the nature of a changing wind.





    For example....here about history and this by .....Illinois Warrior..

    when you bitch about The Constitution's meanings being interpretated to incorporate the modern world - your AR-15 wasn't around in the 1780s .....

    The historical interpretation is not whether the AR 15 was around in the 1780s.


    The interpretation in a historical context is that the government in the 1780s did not trust the Colonialists with a state of the art flintlock Musket.


    And forces in our own government today do not trust our people with a state of the art rifles or arms. Got it now.....understand???!!


    This is the correct historical context...not all this twisted and confused bafflegab...going on between two phony political parties and their shills in the phony media.
    And why is the media, not spinning and or looking out for you, not teaching this line of thought to the people????


    You see....????



    Once you know....you will catch them every time.

    Now you can see this David Hogg fellow, and whoever is sponsoring him, as butt naked.....gaslighters....along with the media and the phony two party system.
    Why are the so called Conservative Republicans not teaching this to the people???? Because they are not really Conservatives....that's why.


    Remember what I keep trying to illustrate here about Englishmen. They have very very severe restrictions on arms.....

    And it is clear that they cannot be trusted with their Brexit vote. Someone is trying to sneak around the vote and keep England in the European Union and stealing their profits.


    If you cannot be trusted with a state of the art flintlock musket or other modern arms...you will never be trusted with your vote???

    Illegal aliens intended to be put on the American voting rolls??? !!! Does this sound like Americans can be trusted with a vote???

    This thing about the 2nd Amendment is so much much more than about bearing arms. Much much more!!!

    The Ishmaelites will give you anything and everything but enough information's and or history for you to think for yourself and put Light on them. Light here being with a Capital L....meaning Truth...and again with a Capital T.

    Someone in this phony two party system needs us disarmed....mentally , physically, as well as Spiritually.


    Be Warned the Ishmaelites.




    Ok....Ok..I'm off my soapbox now......




    My non Ishmaelite .02,

    Orangetom
    Last edited by orangetom1999; 03-02-2019 at 09:57 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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