The [s]First[/s] Only Trump term...so far

For stuff that is general.
Leisher
Site Admin
Posts: 65256
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 9:17 pm
Contact:

The First Trump term.

Post by Leisher »

To be fair, it's pretty stupid to ask a judge to have preconceived judgments about hot button issues and state them publicly. It's also insane to tell people hot button issues are in danger because of a possible SCOTUS nominee unless there are cases pending dealing with those exact issues. I keep hearing "She's going to overturn Roe v. Wade." She might, but a case has to be brought to SCOTUS first, and then accepted.

I also saw people on Twitter melting down because she owns a gun. Oh, the horror!

I watched none of the confirmation hearings, but my wife did. She really liked her and thought the Senators on both sides were clearly more interested in posturing for their party than actually caring if she was right for the job or not. The one thing she doesn't like is her stance on abortion.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

Leisher wrote: To be fair, it's pretty stupid to ask a judge to have preconceived judgments about hot button issues and state them publicly.
I mean, people have opinions. She must have ideas.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Leisher
Site Admin
Posts: 65256
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 9:17 pm
Contact:

The First Trump term.

Post by Leisher »

TheCatt wrote:
Leisher wrote: To be fair, it's pretty stupid to ask a judge to have preconceived judgments about hot button issues and state them publicly.
I mean, people have opinions. She must have ideas.
I'm certain, but making them public is interesting. I'm surprised no lawyer has ever tried to use it against them citing some sort of preconceived judgment.

This is just my own bias, but while I understand judges will have their own opinions on things, I believe they should leave them at the door when they sit to hear a case. I didn't mind her citing multiple times that each case would need to be judged on their facts rather than what opinions she might have.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

Leisher wrote:didn't mind her citing multiple times that each case would need to be judged on their facts rather than what opinions she might have.
but her opinions about those facts are the only reason she's being chosen to begin with. So they are entirely relevant and are the only thing that matter.

when matters make it to the supreme Court it's not because they're being judged on their facts it's because of how the law is being interpreted by The people's opinion.
It's not me, it's someone else.
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

Old man does not understand the difference between Nobel Peace Prize nominations (> 300 per year) and winning (1 per year). Compares his nomination by a single right-wing politician in Norway with Obama's win. Doesn't understand why the press isn't all over it.
It's not me, it's someone else.
Leisher
Site Admin
Posts: 65256
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 9:17 pm
Contact:

The First Trump term.

Post by Leisher »

TheCatt wrote: but her opinions about those facts are the only reason she's being chosen to begin with.
And that's where this all fails for me. I don't think ANY judge should be picked because they agree/disagree with Roe v. Wade or whatever other ruling you want to cite. I think they should be picked for being competent and proven to value the law of the land over all other things. I want judges who are legitimately going to determine cases based on the facts of that case and not their own opinions or political leanings.

For all of the great things RBG did, I think it's pretty shitty that she was always a vote to the left. (And insert any right wing judge in for RBG.)

I think it's complete bullshit that we can always expect the 9th circuit court of appeals to CONSTANTLY have their rulings be based on liberal opinions of the day. (And again, insert any right leaning court for the 9th.)

And yes, I know it's a pie in the sky opinion, but why shouldn't it be correct and what we strive for?

Look at the NBA. The reputation for the officials is a complete joke. Many jokes compare the NBA to being as real as professional wrestling. You can look at their officials and management for why. Management doesn't want rules to get in the way of their stars doing amazing things that something run afoul of the rules. So who do they hire as officials? Do the best officials work their way up from high school to college to the NBA? No. They hire friends, family, quotas, and/or publicity stunts. Thus, the league where the best basketball players in the world compete does NOT have the best officials or even top 10% officials because they don't care about their skill as officials.

The Senate is full of lawyers. It'd be nice if instead of asking direct questions about a judge's opinion on a topic or putting on a show for their party, they instead discussed actual cases the nominee ruled upon and asked what the decision making process what that led to their judgment.
TheCatt wrote: when matters make it to the supreme Court it's not because they're being judged on their facts it's because of how the law is being interpreted by The people's opinion.
Are you my Business Law professor?
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

Leisher wrote: And that's where this all fails for me. I don't think ANY judge should be picked because they agree/disagree with Roe v. Wade or whatever other ruling you want to cite.
It's the only reason they are picked.
Leisher wrote: I want judges who are legitimately going to determine cases based on the facts of that case and not their own opinions or political leanings.
There's no such thing.
Leisher wrote: I think it's complete bullshit that we can always expect the 9th circuit court of appeals to CONSTANTLY have their rulings be based on liberal opinions of the day. (And again, insert any right leaning court for the 9th.)
The makeup of the 9th has changed enough that it's no longer a slamdunk.
Leisher wrote: And yes, I know it's a pie in the sky opinion, but why shouldn't it be correct and what we strive for?
Because facts don't matter. Everything at the SCOTUS level is interpretation of existing words. Nothing is black + white. It's the edges.

I would argue the 9th and 10th amendment provide a pretty board basis for all personal rights (abortion, prostitution, etc), but strangely, very few (if any?) SCOTUS members argue that.
Leisher wrote: Are you my Business Law professor?
I meant the 9 people on the SCOTUS. But it's all intepretation all the way down.
Leisher wrote: It'd be nice if instead of asking direct questions about a judge's opinion on a topic or putting on a show for their party, they instead discussed actual cases the nominee ruled upon and asked what the decision making process what that led to their judgment.
I thought some did? Although, it's hard since she was only briefly a federal judge, so I don't think she has a ton of judgments, other than saying "nigger" doesn't make it a hostile workplace.
It's not me, it's someone else.
GORDON
Site Admin
Posts: 54399
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:43 pm
Location: DTManistan
Contact:

The First Trump term.

Post by GORDON »

It comes down to interpretation.

A basic example is how the Constitution is interpreted... some see it as a list of things the government is allowed to do. That would give the federal government very few actual powers (unless someone INTERPRETED the Interstate Commerce Act to cover anything that might have a single component that crossed a state line, once). Some view the Constitution as "if it aint specifically forbidden, then it's allowed." This is why taxes from California are allowed to be given to people in Alabama after a hurricane.

They're asking her questions to see what her interpretations are, not necessarily her opinions.

edit - Catt beat me to "interpretations" by a few seconds.
"Be bold, and mighty forces will come to your aid."
User avatar
Troy
Posts: 7156
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:00 am

The First Trump term.

Post by Troy »

Lmao. He's such a snake oil salesman.
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

Troy wrote: Lmao. He's such a snake oil salesman.
I mean, Mexico paid for the wall... China paid the tariffs...
It's not me, it's someone else.
User avatar
Troy
Posts: 7156
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:00 am

The First Trump term.

Post by Troy »

TheCatt wrote:
Troy wrote: Lmao. He's such a snake oil salesman.
I mean, Mexico paid for the wall... China paid the tariffs...
Shit, did I wake up in the alternate timeline today?
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

Image

Image
It's not me, it's someone else.
Leisher
Site Admin
Posts: 65256
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 9:17 pm
Contact:

The First Trump term.

Post by Leisher »

Troy wrote: Lmao. He's such a snake oil salesman.
I'm less stunned that he still says stuff like this, and more stunned that people still believe it.

As for the SCOTUS stuff, apologies, I was getting a bit ill yesterday and didn't have the energy to engage. I'll get to it later, but in the SCOTUS thread.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
Leisher
Site Admin
Posts: 65256
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 9:17 pm
Contact:

The First Trump term.

Post by Leisher »

Give credit where it's due, this is a good thing:
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

Leisher wrote: Give credit where it's due, this is a good thing:
Who are we giving credit to? The bipartisan congress? Trump for using a pen?
It's not me, it's someone else.
Leisher
Site Admin
Posts: 65256
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 9:17 pm
Contact:

The First Trump term.

Post by Leisher »

All of the above.
“Every record been destroyed or falsified, books rewritten, pictures repainted, statues, street building renamed, every date altered. The process is continuing day by day. History stops. Nothing exists except endless present in which the Party is right.”
User avatar
Troy
Posts: 7156
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:00 am

The First Trump term.

Post by Troy »

No idea where to put this:
User avatar
Troy
Posts: 7156
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:00 am

The First Trump term.

Post by Troy »

"QAnon, come get your boy"
TheCatt
Site Admin
Posts: 53728
Joined: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm
Location: Cary, NC

The First Trump term.

Post by TheCatt »

To be clear, the actress is 24, I believe.
It's not me, it's someone else.
User avatar
Troy
Posts: 7156
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:00 am

The First Trump term.

Post by Troy »

TheCatt wrote: To be clear, the actress is 24, I believe.
That makes me feel better from a production standpoint, anyway.
Post Reply