- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
re: Supreme Court Live re Birthright Citizenship and Nationwide Injunctions
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
Does Biden's ball sack smell more like Ben Gay or Preparation H?
0
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:06 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
There is a mechanism for modifying the Constitution, but it is difficult for a reason. The slope of "it is not the 19th" century or, more apropos, it is not the 18th century now, is practically ice-covered in its lack of friction. This logic can be applied to every tenet of the Constitution. It could be the impetus for a complete rewriting of said document. I think the administration's signals that it might disregard judicial branch checks on its power was a tactical error. The moment that was given breath, they lost two votes on principle: ACB and JCR.
Weird you're saying to change law we need to modify the constitution in one paragraph then simple tds by two justices changes the law in the second.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:30 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Weird you're saying to change law we need to modify the constitution in one paragraph then simple tds by two justices changes the law in the second.
That is a bizarre interpretation of what I said.
The poster I referred to was suggesting we rewrite the Constitution to reflect 2025 not days past. I pointed out there is a mechanism for that but it is an incredibly slippery slope.
I would suggest their remarks are not based on TDS but on an unwillingness to give the administration extra leeway when the administration has suggested that the judicial branch has very little (if any) check power on the executive branch. They potentially see a constitutional crisis brewing and better to deal with it now than later before the balance of power between branches is eroded. JGR made it clear in his remarks that there are three coequal branches.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:34 pm to Obtuse1
quote:
They potentially see a constitutional crisis brewing and better to deal with it now than later before the balance of power between branches is eroded.
A crisis has been brewing for a while. The perception of the citizenry is that the game is rigged. No one gives a frick if Amy Coney Barrett thinks she’s saving democracy.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 9:58 pm to the808bass
quote:
No one gives a frick if Amy Coney Barrett thinks she’s saving democracy.
She’s a silly little girl. Some women are better served raising children.
Posted on 5/15/25 at 10:16 pm to loogaroo
Dems wanted to pack the court. Lets do it!
Posted on 5/16/25 at 7:20 am to IvoryBillMatt
Birth right was not intended to facilitate illegals. And the attempt by the dems to legalize illegals is unconstitutional
This post was edited on 5/16/25 at 7:22 am
Posted on 5/16/25 at 7:33 am to themunch
A traffic court judge setting national security policy is not what the constitution intended
If scotus rules that district courts set national security policy then we have a real Constitutional Crisis…
If scotus rules that district courts set national security policy then we have a real Constitutional Crisis…
Posted on 5/16/25 at 7:33 am to themunch
quote:
Birth right was not intended to facilitate illegals
Sure, because "illegals" didn't exist when the 14A was written. That came decades later via Congress.
Posted on 5/16/25 at 7:34 am to Zgeo
quote:
If scotus rules that district courts set national security policy
No matter what, this isn't going to be the ruling
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:01 am to loogaroo
quote:
Some women are better served raising children.
...and she's not very good at that either. She collects token black children from third world countries.
This post was edited on 5/16/25 at 8:03 am
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:25 am to hogcard1964
From Haiti of all places. I really want to believe she'll be reasonable about this but then I remember her children and that she's a woman.
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:32 am to hogcard1964
As if you didn’t get a majority of the outcome you have wanted with this incredibly politically right winged court
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:34 am to Barfunkle
Oh how dare a Catholic do a good deed and adopt children from a poor place.
You’re finding fault with that?
You’re finding fault with that?
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:36 am to SlowFlowPro
Just like birthright wasn’t intended for illegals, the 2nd amendment wasn’t intended for civilians and assault rifles right?
Or does the right and it’s constitutionalist just decide when and when they won’t follow their supposed line of thinking ?
Or does the right and it’s constitutionalist just decide when and when they won’t follow their supposed line of thinking ?
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:42 am to StrongSafety
Yes, I'm worried that it will influence her to make a decision that's bad for the country.
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:46 am to StrongSafety
quote:
You’re finding fault with that?
Absolutely
There's plenty of needy American children.
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:48 am to StrongSafety
quote:
As if you didn’t get a majority of the outcome you have wanted with this incredibly politically right winged court
quote:
StrongSafety
Always with the dumbest of takes.
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:54 am to Barfunkle
Bad how ? What happen to constitutional law ?
Or doesn’t it only work when it fits your agenda
Or doesn’t it only work when it fits your agenda
Posted on 5/16/25 at 8:57 am to hogcard1964
quote:
Absolutely There's plenty of needy American children.
Ah yes the word Catholic doesn’t mean universal. Ah yes God only cares about his American children first. Ah yes God said America first, everything is second.
Your Christian Fundamentalism and Nationalism is incongruent with the Catholic fatih. Let her profess her faith like
The 1st amendment says she can.
How do people like you go to church with such rotten beliefs like that?
Page 7 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News