Latest Breaking News

Uncle Joe

(65,015 posts)

34. I understand you agree with the dissent, my only point is that De Facto by

Fri Jan 20, 2012, 03:44 PM

Jan 2012

agreeing to insert itself into a disputed election, which is supposed to be run by the state according to the Constitution, the SC blatantly used politics as its' motivation.

They couldn't possibly give Bush standing by stating he would be harmed should the counting of all the votes proceed without consideration that Gore would be harmed should they stop the count.

The SC had no business in this case, there were already mechanisms in place to determine the outcome whether it ultimately be the counting of the votes, the Florida Legislature and/or the U.S. Congress.

Knowing they were in the wrong, they even decided that inspite of its' heavy ramifications this decision couldn't set precedent.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Journalist Chris Hedges Sues Obama Admin over Indefinite Detention of U.S. Citizens Approved in NDAA [View all] CHIMO Jan 2012 OP

Good, let's hope it's found unconstitutional Ter Jan 2012 #1

+1000000000 nt Joe Shlabotnik Jan 2012 #5

Doesnt someone have to be harmed by the bill to get into the court system? rhett o rick Jan 2012 #19

Correct, a person MUST have "Standing" but in this case the Reporter clearly does happyslug Jan 2012 #21

Remember that the courts IMO fail miserably in both the Hamdi and Padilla cases. rhett o rick Jan 2012 #22

As I recall Roe in Constitutional Law, the reasoning wasn't that she might want an abortion in the 24601 Jan 2012 #23

Don't confuse the issue with actual law. Or facts. msanthrope Jan 2012 #26

But the point I was trying to make, was the Court COULD have avoided the case happyslug Jan 2012 #27

Wrong. He does not have standing. Read Lujan v. Defenders and get back to us. msanthrope Jan 2012 #24

I am talking the POLITICS of the Court happyslug Jan 2012 #28

So, you don't have the law, but are arguing politics? msanthrope Jan 2012 #29

If politics or conjecture don't come into play why did the SC give Bush standing Uncle Joe Jan 2012 #30

Because Mr. Bush claimed an actual, direct harm that could be redressed. msanthrope Jan 2012 #31

How could Bush be harmed in a disputed, two man, state run election, and Gore not be harmed by Uncle Joe Jan 2012 #32

None of the other issues you bring up have anything to do with msanthrope Jan 2012 #33

I understand you agree with the dissent, my only point is that De Facto by Uncle Joe Jan 2012 #34

So you want SCOTUS to find Hedges has standing for political reasons msanthrope Jan 2012 #35

It isn't a question of what I want, it's a question of what is. Uncle Joe Jan 2012 #36

War Powers Resolution EVDebs Jan 2012 #2

It is ilegal and they know it lovuian Jan 2012 #3

The constitutionality of a law is determined by the court system. rhett o rick Jan 2012 #20

Glad to hear it. tblue Jan 2012 #4

No need to worry, O is just playing 12 dimensional chess JJW Jan 2012 #6

This is badly timed. If the current right-wing SCOTUS finds it Constitutional, it will be very hard rhett o rick Jan 2012 #7

SCOTUS knows its ilegal too and if they vote lovuian Jan 2012 #8

The SCOTUS is acting well beyond their Constitutional duties. They are out of control. rhett o rick Jan 2012 #10

+1000 Wind Dancer Jan 2012 #25

What do you do when the supreme court becomes illegitimate? Mosaic Jan 2012 #9

Guillotines. nm rhett o rick Jan 2012 #11

This issue goes beyond right and left Ter Jan 2012 #17

So do you think the SCOTUS would rule against it? nm rhett o rick Jan 2012 #18

Reality check JJW Jan 2012 #12

How great would it be Iwillnevergiveup Jan 2012 #13

kr Norrin Radd Jan 2012 #14

So that's why the recent character assassination against Hedges has been occuring MNBrewer Jan 2012 #15

If someone commits a crime christx30 Jan 2012 #16