Justice Kavanaugh recognizes that the President is the sole Commander in Chief and that Judges need to butt out of military issues

Ben_Natuf · 2022-04-09T12:16:18.710Z

the us military is always in the actual service of the united states. who else would they be serving?

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T12:21:04.993Z

WorldWatcher:

Which is regards to the militia, not the federal military services.

Section 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

JWK

WorldWatcher · 2022-04-09T12:25:17.692Z

johnwk2:

WorldWatcher:

Which is regards to the militia, not the federal military services.

Section 2. The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

JWK

Bless your heart.

WW

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T12:30:45.809Z

Ben_Natuf:

the us military is always in the actual service of the united states. who else would they be serving?

And just what is the President’s authority as Commander in Chief?

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C1-1-2/ALDE_00001128/

JWK

Ben_Natuf · 2022-04-09T12:32:37.569Z

to command, and in relation to this enforce the ucmj.

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T16:25:18.345Z

Ben_Natuf:

to command, and in relation to this enforce the ucmj.

I appreciate your opinion, however, just what are the president’s powers as Commander in Chief as intended and stated during the framing and ratification of our Constitution, which give context to its text? For example, in FEDERALIST NO. 69 Hamilton states the following:

"In this article therefore the power of the President would be inferior to that of either the Monarch or the Governor. Secondly; the President is to be Commander in Chief of the army and navy of the United States. In this respect his authority would be nominally the same with that of the King of Great-Britain, but in substance much inferior to it. It would amount to nothing more than the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and Admiral of the confederacy; while that of the British King extends to the declaring of war and to the raising and regulating of fleets and armies; all which by the Constitution under consideration would appertain to the Legislature. "

Also see Madison Debates August 17

“Mr. MADISON and Mr. GERRY moved to insert “declare,” striking out “make” war; leaving to the Executive the power to repel sudden attacks.”

JWK

Those who reject abiding by the text of our Constitution, and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agree to, as documented from historical records ___ its framing and ratification debates which give context to its text ___ wish to remove the anchor and rudder of our constitutional system so they may then be free to “interpret” the Constitution to mean whatever they wish it to mean.

Ben_Natuf · 2022-04-09T17:45:08.846Z

when the president enforces the ucmj, he is enforcing the rules made by the congress. are you arguing the president lacks the authority to enforce the rules the congress created? that would be a unique argument.

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T18:31:05.161Z

Ben_Natuf:

when the president enforces the ucmj, he is enforcing the rules made by the congress. are you arguing the president lacks the authority to enforce the rules the congress created? that would be a unique argument.

Arguing?

I thought my posts were crystal clear. My position on such matters is to be obedient to the text of our Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agreed to as documented from historical records ___ its framing and ratification debates ___ which give context to its text.

JWK

Why have a written constitution approved by the people if those who it is designed to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?

Ben_Natuf · 2022-04-09T18:41:58.008Z

okay, then i’m not sure where you’re going here.

the congress made the rules regarding immunizations and included it in the ucmj. those rules include fda approved and eau approved vaccinations. they also include exemptions including religious exemptions, how to apply for them, what a commander must do to determine whether to grant it, what happens if he doesn’t and you still refuse, and of course from there the entire appeal process all the way to secdef.

FreeAndClear · 2022-04-09T19:14:45.190Z

Peyote consumption can be or is a religious practice.

There is a scotus decision on the subject.

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T19:27:35.237Z

Ben_Natuf:

okay, then i’m not sure where you’re going here.

I thought the object of my posts were self-evident.

I’m encouraging, in such discussions, opinions to be in harmony with the text of our written constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was agree to, as documented from historical records, which give context to its text. I also encourage the fundamental rules of constitutional construction to be referenced and followed in such discussions which adds legitimacy to contentions made.

JWK

The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

STODR · 2022-04-09T19:37:57.630Z

Some how people will think this is Different.

NBC News

Judge strikes down military's limits on service members with HIV

The ruling by a federal district judge found that the Defense Department policy that barred deploying HIV-positive service members is discriminatory.

Someone is gonna say but they are not contagious. Either are the unvaccinated.

PeterGriffin · 2022-04-09T19:44:42.836Z

STODR:

Some how people will think this is Different.

I think it is obvious that it’s completely different. Can you walk me through the thought process that makes you think it’s an apt comparison?

STODR · 2022-04-09T19:50:02.830Z

Both are not contagious and the judge overuled the military. In both cases the judge ruled the military had to deploy with them. I disagree with both decisions.

Now tell me how they are different.

PeterGriffin · 2022-04-09T19:54:23.190Z

Bring an antivax weirdo crank isn’t protected under the ADA.

STODR · 2022-04-09T19:56:00.849Z

So you have nothing but name calling got it.

There are any things that fall under the ADA that military doesn’t allow.

For your reading pleasure

Search Results for “military” – Learning Disabilities Association of America.

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T19:58:06.690Z

PeterGriffin:

Bring an antivax weirdo crank isn’t protected under the ADA.

The ADA is not authorized by the terms of our Constitution. It is a usurpation of power.

JWK

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T20:08:09.736Z

Ben_Natuf:

the congress made the rules regarding immunizations and included it in the ucmj.

We are talking about the President’s authority. Keep in mind Congress may not delegate to the President such essential elements of its lawmaking power as its power to declare principles and standards, or general public policy (Lee v. Delmont, 228 Minn. 101: Knight and Wall Co. v. Bryant, 178 So 2d 5, (1965); Nahlen v. Woods, 255 Ark. 974; 16 Am Jur 2D; Constitutional Law, § 337.

JWK

PeterGriffin · 2022-04-09T20:13:39.477Z

STODR:

So you have nothing but name calling got it.

There are any things that fall under the ADA that military doesn’t allow.

For your reading pleasure

Do you read your own wings? HIV status is protected under the ADA. You can’t discriminate employment FaceTime HIV status. It’s against the law. The military was forced to comply after decades of non compliance.

Bring an antivax weirdo crank isn’t protected under the ADA.

johnwk2 · 2022-04-09T20:17:39.331Z

PeterGriffin:

Bring an antivax weirdo crank isn’t protected under the ADA.

Under what provision of our federal Constitution has Congress been delegated power to prohibit distinctions being made based upon one’s disabilities?

JWK