- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:08 pm to Ole War Skule
quote:
Liberals really are just state worshiping totalitarians.
This is why we call them filth.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:12 pm to Helo
Pesky zoning and goddamn nimbys are the reason the SF housing market is such utter horseshite for normies.
The elimination of zoning has its place but as uje, your mileage may vary.
The elimination of zoning has its place but as uje, your mileage may vary.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:15 pm to Jbird
I have no strong feelings on this matter, but why is everyone so excited that SCOTUS ruled to allow bringing these cases first in federal court?
It seems to me that state courts should handle cases against state and local governments by their own citizens and that the federal courts should handle similar claims against the federal government. There is a certain symmetry to that arrangement.
It seems to me that state courts should handle cases against state and local governments by their own citizens and that the federal courts should handle similar claims against the federal government. There is a certain symmetry to that arrangement.
This post was edited on 6/21/19 at 1:17 pm
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:17 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
I have no strong feelings on this matter, but why is everyone so excited that SCOTUS ruled to allow bringing these cases first in federal court?
Um, probably because the right being infringed upon is conferred by the U.S. constitution.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:21 pm to gthog61
quote:
Well since it doesn’t matter you don’t waste time voting, right?
I am not sure what youre getting at...
Are you asking if I support one party or the other?
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:24 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
He responded that it was essential for the security of the country.
Gotta love that small govt
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:26 pm to AggieHank86
I’m a States rights fan but this makes sense as the right to private property ownership is in the Bill of Rights...therefore a federal matter.
Also having a state court rule against a state law ...and all the politics that entails...is probably one of the reasons this thievery continues.
Also having a state court rule against a state law ...and all the politics that entails...is probably one of the reasons this thievery continues.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:28 pm to Jbird
quote:
Justices Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor
Signed on to the civil asset forfeiture case because they know it's sexy. They showed how they really feel with their dissent in this case.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:30 pm to SquatchDawg
quote:oh, it falls under “federal question” jurisdiction, clearly. That was not my question. I was just curious why so many poster seem excited at the prospect of bypassing the state courts.
I’m a States rights fan but this makes sense as the right to private property ownership is in the Bill of Rights...therefore a federal matter.
It just seems an odd issue for getting people excited.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:40 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
oh, it falls under “federal question” jurisdiction, clearly. That was not my question. I was just curious why so many poster seem excited at the prospect of bypassing the state courts.
Because this is a federal matter. It should never have been placed in the hands of the states. When a state abuses its power against the Constitution, we should be able to immediately go to federal courts for relief, not wait until all appeals have gone through state courts before even getting the chance to go to federal court all while knowing how the state will rule from the very start. Most people cannot afford that. It is an undue burden.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 1:58 pm to Jbird
quote:Nope. You can’t dissent from this ruling and be a Liberal. Liberals are for freedom and permissiveness. Hear Justices are the Authortarian members of the court.
Justices Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor – the liberal members of the court
Posted on 6/21/19 at 2:17 pm to Jbird
Kagan's dissent is among the shittiest dissents I've ever read. She's not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 2:31 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
oh, it falls under “federal question” jurisdiction, clearly. That was not my question. I was just curious why so many poster seem excited at the prospect of bypassing the state courts.
It just seems an odd issue for getting people excited
Excited? Well, I don't know that I'm excited but I 100% support being able to go right to the fed when the question is literally DIRECTLY related to the Bill of Rights.
It seems absurd to have to basically go bankrupt hiring lawyers to go through YEARS before even getting to the REAL deciders..............go bankrupt doing this all because the state took your shite in a questionable manner.
Finally, there will be an ancillary benefit to this.
Localities have often banked upon the leverage created by the fact you pretty much had to mortgage your life to fight them. They USED it to steal from you.
They'll likely be a LOT less capricious with YOUR property now that their leverage has been severely weakened.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 2:35 pm to Jbird
quote:
Justices Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor – the liberal members of the court – dissented
Liberals not giving a frick about property rights.
This is my shocked face
Posted on 6/21/19 at 3:20 pm to Jbird
quote:
Justices Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor – the socialist and anti constitution leaning liberal members of the court – dissented.
there FIFY
i bet this is the beginning of what clarence thomas was talking about in his comments the other day when he said they need to correct many wrong presidents set by previous courts
Posted on 6/21/19 at 5:06 pm to SlapahoeTribe
Japan handles zoning on national level, not at the local level like we do. That's why housing in Tokyo is much cheaper than it is in NYC. Wish we would adopt that policy.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 5:27 pm to Jbird
Roe v. WADE..........
SOON
SOON
Posted on 6/21/19 at 5:27 pm to Jbird
Other than not wanting to break a supreme court precedent, I don't really get the argument against this ruling. I know that was Kagan's big issue, but are there others?
Any ruling giving more rights to private property owners is a win in my book.
Any ruling giving more rights to private property owners is a win in my book.
Posted on 6/21/19 at 5:29 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
Other than not wanting to break a supreme court precedent,
The whole precedent argument is trash, especially if it's a dogshit Marxist ruling from trash prog judges
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News