what happens if Kavanagh gets into supreme court?
sly279 wrote:
Giving we are humans I think the court and all lower courts should be half republicans and half Democrat’s by law always keeping a balance. The other seat should be a person both parties hate as that means they as unbiased as a human can be. Either party having a majority is bad in my opinion. I’m hated by both party’s I’d also like congress split its better for most people that neither party gets what they want
It took awhile, but hey look at that - Sly and I finally agree on something.
First they came for the Unions
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Unionist
Then they came for the Muslims
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Muslim
Then they came for the Mexicans
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Mexican
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell
AspE wrote:
jimmy m wrote:
Since Kavanagh was subjected to significant character assassination, it will leave a mark. I suspect that the experience will affect him in the following way:
Within our legal system there is presumption of innocence. I suspect he will become a staunch advocate for the guarantees provided by the law. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.".
Within our legal system there is presumption of innocence. I suspect he will become a staunch advocate for the guarantees provided by the law. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.".
He hasn't been charged with anything, so this does not apply. A Supreme Court nominee or any congressperson is held to a standard of ethics that ordinary people aren't held to. You don't have a right to a seat on the court.
It sure looks like he was on trial.
_________________
Author of Practical Preparations for a Coronavirus Pandemic.
A very unique plan. As Dr. Paul Thompson wrote, "This is the very best paper on the virus I have ever seen."
Magna wrote:
AspE wrote:
LOL, the end of Democracy is hilarious.
We...reap what we sow?
So how do you fix the situation when everyone is stuck in a bubble and considers the other side the enemy rather than compatriots?
_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell
blackicmenace wrote:
Magna wrote:
AspE wrote:
LOL, the end of Democracy is hilarious.
We...reap what we sow?
So how do you fix the situation when everyone is stuck in a bubble and considers the other side the enemy rather than compatriots?
I have no idea.
We have to wait until we hit rock bottom, realize that we're all full of ourselves, realize that we as humans, for generations have screwed up in major ways, collectively take ourselves down a WHOLE bunch of notches and start our relationships over? Love one another by first realizing that we should all, to a person, be ashamed of ourselves for what we prioritize rather than what we should prioritize?
jimmy m wrote:
AspE wrote:
jimmy m wrote:
Since Kavanagh was subjected to significant character assassination, it will leave a mark. I suspect that the experience will affect him in the following way:
Within our legal system there is presumption of innocence. I suspect he will become a staunch advocate for the guarantees provided by the law. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.".
Within our legal system there is presumption of innocence. I suspect he will become a staunch advocate for the guarantees provided by the law. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.".
He hasn't been charged with anything, so this does not apply. A Supreme Court nominee or any congressperson is held to a standard of ethics that ordinary people aren't held to. You don't have a right to a seat on the court.
It sure looks like he was on trial.
He was. "conformation hearing" and "job interview" are complete euphemisms this time around.
LoveNotHate wrote:
The fun is ahead of us.
Justice Breyer <--80 years old
Justice Ginsberg <--86 years old
Trump may have two more to replace.
Justice Breyer <--80 years old
Justice Ginsberg <--86 years old
Trump may have two more to replace.
Huge lesson learned. When your party is in power and you reach a normal retirement age...retire, vacate the bench, leave and let a younger justice of your political persuasion replace you!! We humans tend to be self serving. At least from now on a justice who stays on under the above conditions will obviously be self serving.
Last edited by Magna on 04 Oct 2018, 10:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LoveNotHate wrote:
The fun is ahead of us.
Justice Breyer <--80 years old
Justice Ginsberg <--86 years old
Trump may have two more to replace.
Justice Breyer <--80 years old
Justice Ginsberg <--86 years old
Trump may have two more to replace.
Be careful what you wish for, it might just come true.
_________________
“Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric.” ― Bertrand Russell
blackicmenace wrote:
sly279 wrote:
Giving we are humans I think the court and all lower courts should be half republicans and half Democrat’s by law always keeping a balance. The other seat should be a person both parties hate as that means they as unbiased as a human can be. Either party having a majority is bad in my opinion. I’m hated by both party’s I’d also like congress split its better for most people that neither party gets what they want
There shouldn't be any political affiliation whatsoever. They should be impartial. Unfortunately, THAT won't happen.
Until until we invent a emotion killing drug humans can’t be impartial the court has never been impartial. I bet this discussion has been going in since it was formed. Actually how was it formed did George Washington get to appoint all the judges.
Spooky_Mulder wrote:
sly279 wrote:
Giving we are humans I think the court and all lower courts should be half republicans and half Democrat’s by law always keeping a balance. The other seat should be a person both parties hate as that means they as unbiased as a human can be. Either party having a majority is bad in my opinion. I’m hated by both party’s I’d also like congress split its better for most people that neither party gets what they want
It took awhile, but hey look at that - Sly and I finally agree on something.
I once servered in a Supreme Court like function for a online game alliance(nation but it’s a game about nations so alliance) it was called council and was in charge of deciding if charter(constitution) changes or laws were legal under the current charter. We had 120 ish people in the alliance and the council say 5 elected people while the overall leader was a president. If he wanted to change stuff he needed 3/5 majority to do this preventing a dictatorship.( after a major war the council was removed as democracy is too slow they said) anyways you had two parties same as in real life maybe humans natural gravitate to such things.
The council ended up 3 old guards and two youngsters. I was undecided and usually ended up the deciding vote I listened to both sides as well as opinions from members as they would put forth opinions to be heard by the council. While the other 4 would always split except in cases of being attacked.
That is what we need though over all I got sick of the politics as they’d trie to sway me or bribe me etc I refused to and so eventually I just didn’t run for relection, another old guard that wasn’t unbiased got in and the council was then 3-2 the president could then do as he pleased and eventually repealed the charter and started a dictatorship. Thus ending democracy and leading to the great exodus, the alliance shunk to 40 people where it remains to day its past of being a major pier just a faint memory.
Want to experience politics? Play web browser games lol. There’s actually an interesting one all about laws. You run a nation and pass laws if you join the United Nations you have to Abid by their laws and get to vote and there’s regional delegates that run for elections it’s amusing for while. I ran two a democracy and a total dictatorship.
What I learned from both games is I want nothing to do with politics I’d never want to run for any kind of office.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Alabama Supreme Court - Embryo is a child |
01 Mar 2024, 1:51 am |
Which court card best describes YOU? |
16 Mar 2024, 1:53 am |
Accommodations for Aspies in Court Litigation |
11 Apr 2024, 3:32 pm |
Israel and the International Criminal Court |
13 Feb 2024, 5:01 pm |