Let’s stick to reality.
There is no “right” interpretation of the constitution. It all depends on your political leanings
Only in the minds of lefties.
If that were true The Constitution would have no meaning at all.
As for the “fantasy” this is the oath each Federal Justice must take.
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
1 Like
what would make you think balance is a requirement? were you concerned about balance when the liberal block held a majority? no, you weren’t.
1 Like
oddly enough, in defiance of liberal myth, they already do this.
Lol. SCOTUS itself is taking a case with judicial balance.
Allan
There is obviously an important federal question regarding judicial balance
Allan
Final arbiter? liberal myth. the congress can over rule the courts (except in cases of original jurisdiction) any time they want all they have to do is strip them of any jurisdiction.
in state courts. personally i find the requirement repugnant. i can’t think of any reason why states constitutions should not be allowed to have it though. the issue in this case is as usual, democrats attempting to game the system.
Lol. That was a looonnnnng time ago.
Allan
i didn’t say democrat, i said liberal.
now we have 4 conservatives, 3 liberals and a 2 politicians in a dresses.
before this we had 4 conservatives, 4 liberals and a politician in a dress.
and before that 3 conservatives, 4 liberals and 2 politicians in dresses.
Right, and how many times has that been done.
For practical purposes, SCOTUS is it.
Lol not even close.
It’s been such a long time since a liberal court has been the majority.
Allan
Right you are. Congress can’t get out of its way these days.
Allan
its been done many times. not often enough though. bottom line, scotus is not the final arbiter, they are just the biggest hurdle to overcome. their opinions are granted all the authority the other 2 branches choose to give them. it should be a lot, but their power is not absolute. we have no superior branch of government
House passes legislation only to die in senate.
Allan
Give the forum a recent example.
If it’s been done many times, you should not have any problems coming up with a example.
Allan
its been a long time since either were, the politicians in dresses, by virtue of being deciding votes, have ruled the courts for some time.
1 Like
Yeah I don’t believe it either.
gitmo. they did hold back some allowing only the 1st circuit to review and only in some circumstances. the scotus for instance cannot order their release, they’ve said as much.
