Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
I just think it is silly when people defend the moral reputation of an institution that once ruled black people are merely talking farm animals and therefore not really human beings, much less citizens who can petition for redress.
-
- Posts: 15157
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
Speaker to Animals wrote:This guy makes a good case:
That prof nails it.
-
- Posts: 15157
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
Can you imagine the discussion there would have been in Philadelphia if there had been any idea at the time of the fuckery that John Marshall, Roger Taney, Harry Blackmun, et al, were about to unfold?Speaker to Animals wrote:The Supreme Court almost always gets the most important moral questions wrong as well, from the humanity of a black man to killing babies. It's pretty fucked when you step back and think about it.
-
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:48 am
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
Do the Supremacy Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause not factor into the discussion?Speaker to Animals wrote:This guy makes a good case:
Hontar: We must work in the world, your eminence. The world is thus.
Altamirano: No, Señor Hontar. Thus have we made the world... thus have I made it.
Altamirano: No, Señor Hontar. Thus have we made the world... thus have I made it.
-
- Posts: 15157
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
Right. Not.
We were talking about Article III.
We were talking about Article III.
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
If you want to understand what fuckery is going down in the United States in a given generation, just figure out which group of human beings the Supreme Court hates most. Right now, that's babies, but I have a feeling it's going to shift towards white men in another generation.
-
- Posts: 222
- Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2017 9:48 am
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
No, I know. I mean in the video around the 1:25 mark, starts to discuss the Federalist view of limited government in general, but didn’t mention those two clauses which seem open the door for a looser interpretation of the Constitution with more flexibility beyond the enumerated powers.Fife wrote:Right. Not.
We were talking about Article III.
Hontar: We must work in the world, your eminence. The world is thus.
Altamirano: No, Señor Hontar. Thus have we made the world... thus have I made it.
Altamirano: No, Señor Hontar. Thus have we made the world... thus have I made it.
-
- Posts: 1819
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 1:52 am
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
We are gonna still pretend that school is the only source even now?GrumpyCatFace wrote:Yes... we need more less-educated people as judges and lawyers. They're certainly too qualified.The terms “Front-Row Kids” and “Back-Row Kids,” coined by the photographer Chris Arnade, describe the divide between the educated upper middle class, who are staying ahead in today’s economy, and the less educated working class, who are doing poorly. The differences in education—and the values associated with elite schooling—have produced a divide in America that is on a par with that of race
This will work out well.
While we're at it, we should continue to expect absolutely no knowledge from our legislators and executive branches. This is a strategy for success.
-
- Posts: 25283
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
- Location: Ohio
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
Of course not. But if you can’t even finish college, then you shouldn’t be a federal anything.Hwen Hoshino wrote:We are gonna still pretend that school is the only source even now?GrumpyCatFace wrote:Yes... we need more less-educated people as judges and lawyers. They're certainly too qualified.The terms “Front-Row Kids” and “Back-Row Kids,” coined by the photographer Chris Arnade, describe the divide between the educated upper middle class, who are staying ahead in today’s economy, and the less educated working class, who are doing poorly. The differences in education—and the values associated with elite schooling—have produced a divide in America that is on a par with that of race
This will work out well.
While we're at it, we should continue to expect absolutely no knowledge from our legislators and executive branches. This is a strategy for success.
So far as actual knowledge, sure - it’s not necessary. But we need some kind of baseline here.
-
- Posts: 7978
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:47 pm
Re: Should the Federal Judiciary Be a "Co-Equal" Branch?
Wow look at the goalpost moving here. At first we were defending the Ivy league elite but then 1 innocent question and now a janitor has to at least finish college.GrumpyCatFace wrote:Of course not. But if you can’t even finish college, then you shouldn’t be a federal anything.Hwen Hoshino wrote:We are gonna still pretend that school is the only source even now?GrumpyCatFace wrote:
Yes... we need more less-educated people as judges and lawyers. They're certainly too qualified.
This will work out well.
While we're at it, we should continue to expect absolutely no knowledge from our legislators and executive branches. This is a strategy for success.
So far as actual knowledge, sure - it’s not necessary. But we need some kind of baseline here.