RETIREDFAN1 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 http://www.wnd.com/2018/01/supremes-retreat-on-same-sex-marriage/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 (edited) We are hanging on by a thread in the SC ... Imagine which way these types of cases would go with a Hilldabeast SC appointee ... Edited January 9, 2018 by KirtFalcon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 It's about time someone came to their senses. Many feel that these cakes are obscenities. If they want to buy a cake fine, but they can decorate it themselves or have someone else decorate it. I'm sure there are other bakeries that would cater to their deviant lifestyle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/22/ruth-bader-ginsburg-shocks-sundance-crowd-with-her-own-metoo-story.html That's rough now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I'm saying this is false. Maybe she thought that's what he wanted, but as I stated in another thread there's some women that say they have been harassed, but nobody would. They're lucky to have a boyfriend or even get married. She's one of them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted March 8, 2018 Author Share Posted March 8, 2018 http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/03/07/supreme-court-takes-two-cases-that-could-scale-back-federal-power/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted March 21, 2018 Author Share Posted March 21, 2018 http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/pro-lifers-very-hopeful-in-key-case-before-supreme-court/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RETIREDFAN1 Posted April 4, 2018 Author Share Posted April 4, 2018 Justice Kennedy: You Will Hear of Retirement and Rumors of Retirement by Kevin Cain, J.D. [Editor’s Note: The following article was written by A.P. auxiliary staff writer, Kevin Cain, who holds degrees from Freed-Hardeman University (B.S., M.Min.) and the Doctor of Jurisprudence from South Texas College of Law. A former Briefing Attorney of The First Court of Appeals, his current practice focuses on litigation at the trial and appellate levels in both State and Federal Courts.] Rumors are flying again (this time from U.S. Senator Dean Heller) that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy will retire this summer.1 This is not the first time rumors have circulated about the elusive retirement of Justice Kennedy. The topic seems to come up at least once or twice a year lately. His retirement is of particular interest because he is the second oldest justice sitting on the United States Supreme Court (Ginsburg is 84, Kennedy is 81, and Breyer is 79). He has also been serving longer than any other justice on this bench. However, his retirement has been of particular interest because he has been what is frequently referred to as the “swing vote” on the Supreme Court—meaning, he often decides the outcome of many Supreme Court cases which people often ascribe to “conservative” or “liberal” ideologies. Kennedy was appointed to the United States Supreme Court by President Reagan in 1988. While it was initially thought that he would be a solid conservative on the bench, his rulings have waffled back and forth on the conservative-liberal spectrum. His vote is often the deciding vote between four Supreme Court liberals and four Supreme Court conservatives to determine the outcome of that case. Here is a brief overview of some of the more noteworthy cases where Justice Kennedy sided with the left: Kennedy joined the plurality opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey2 reaffirming Roe v. Wade and the right to abortion under the Due Process Clause. Kennedy authored the 6-3 majority opinion in Romer v. Evans3 invalidating a Colorado Constitutional provision denying homosexuals the right to bring discrimination claims. Kennedy authored the 6-3 majority opinion in Lawrence v. Texas4 invalidating criminal laws against homosexual sodomy under the Due Process Clause. Kennedy authored the 5-4 majority opinion in Kennedy v. Louisiana5 holding that the Eighth Amendment (“cruel and unusual punishment”) bars the death penalty for the rape of a child where the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the victim’s death, because the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim's life was not taken. Kennedy authored the 5-4 majority opinion in United States v. Windsor6 holding Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (defining marriage as a union between a man and woman) was unconstitutional. Kennedy authored the 5-4 majority opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges7 which holds that all states must allow same-sex couples to marry. The following are some prominent cases where Justice Kennedy sided with the right: Kennedy joined the 5-4 majority in Hodgson v. Minnesota8 upholding a law requiring both parents to be notified when their minor daughter wanted an abortion. Kennedy joined the 5-4 majority in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale9 upholding the Boy Scouts right to ban homosexuals from being scoutmasters. Kennedy joined the 5-4 majority in District of Columbia v. Heller10 striking down the ban on handguns in the District of Columbia. Kennedy authored the 5-4 majority opinion in Florence v. County of Burlington (2012)11holding that people admitted to the general jail population may be subjected to strip searches even when there is no reason to suspect contraband. Ever since the Obergefell opinion on gay marriage, people are beginning to wake up to the belief that the judiciary (and the Supreme Court in particular) may be the most powerful and influential branch of the U.S. government. The exclusive right to interpret the laws and Constitution of the United States is a powerful tool. For example, Congress can pass a law defining marriage as between a man and a woman, but the U.S. Supreme Court can strike down that law as unconstitutional. In fact, that is just what Justice Kennedy did in United States v. Windsor. The only recourse the public has in that situation is to petition Congress to amend the Constitution, which is a very rare occurrence. The last two amendments to our Constitution took place in 1992 and 1971. In other words, when the Supreme Court says something is unconstitutional, that is usually the end of the matter. Simply put, a U.S. Supreme Court justice may not be a high profile position, but it is a very powerful one nonetheless. With a stroke of the pen, Justice Kennedy changed the history of the United States by holding that all states are forced by the Constitution to recognize same-sex marriages. The homosexual community has been emboldened and the pressure is on. People are losing their jobs and are being shouted down and physically intimidated for having the conviction to stand by the Bible when it comes to calling sin “sin.” Have you noticed more and more TV shows and movies where homosexual characters are more prominent than ever? If you just followed the pseudo-reality of TV shows and movies, one would think that nearly half the population is homosexual. Have you noticed how businesses are subtly interjecting homosexual couples into their commercials? A company selling homes shows a quick montage of scenes depicting the joys of home ownership, including kids playing in a park, a mom and dad holding up a baby, two men holding hands, and grandparents going for a walk. It is quick and subtle, but this sin is all around us, and the United States Supreme Court says it is sanctioned and protected by the Constitution—all because one man who stands between an ideologically splintered court decided to swing to the left. This is why so many are talking about and interested in when Justice Kennedy will retire. If Justice Kennedy were to retire soon, it would allow President Trump to fill a second Supreme Court seat after nominating Neil Gorsuch to replace Antonin Scalia, who died in 2016. It would be hard to overestimate the importance of the role of the President when he nominates the next Supreme Court justice, a justice who does not serve for a term, but is appointed for life. And the role of a Supreme Court justice is an incredibly powerful position. No disrespect intended, but when someone has the exclusive ability to interpret the law for all, that can (it shouldn’t, but it can) unfortunately turn into the role of creating the law as well. Therefore, please pray for your government and political leaders that they will make decisions that will allow us to lead quiet and peaceful lives (1 Timothy 2:2). ENDNOTES 1 Google Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=justice+kennedy+retirement&rlz=1C1LDJZ_enUS639US661&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwin5oeS_OvZAhUFbq0KHUKbDTQQ_AUICigB&biw=996&bih=566. 2 Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992). 3 Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620 (1996). 4 Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). 5 Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008). 6 United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. 12 (2013). 7 Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2071, 576 U.S. (2015). 8 Hodgson v. Minnesota, 497 U.S. 417 (1990). 9 Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000). 10 District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008). 11 Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders, 566 U.S. 318 (2012). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Hopefully we can get a twofer retirement ... Kennedy and Ginsburg ... while Trump is in office ... Bryer retiring would be icing on the cake ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Ginsburg will never retire. I reckon she'll pass away before she'll step down. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 (edited) 14 minutes ago, AKA said: Ginsburg will never retire. I reckon she'll pass away before she'll step down. I thought it was reported that she had pancreatic cancer a few years ago ... never thought she would last this long ... https://www.webmd.com/cancer/pancreatic-cancer/news/20090213/ruth-bader-ginsburgs-pancreatic-cancer-found-early Edited April 4, 2018 by KirtFalcon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 8 minutes ago, KirtFalcon said: I thought it was reported that she had pancreatic cancer a few years ago ... never thought she would last this long ... https://www.webmd.com/cancer/pancreatic-cancer/news/20090213/ruth-bader-ginsburgs-pancreatic-cancer-found-early She's a tough ol' bird. I wouldn't bet on her passing before the next election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte1076 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 Could you just imagine how much the media (and the left) would flip if there were more Supreme Court picks during this administration? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 2 minutes ago, Monte1076 said: Could you just imagine how much the media (and the left) would flip if there were more Supreme Court picks during this administration? Oh man... it would be crazy. You just thought they had their knives out. It would go nuclear. Anarchy in the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 We have sodomites running around with renewed ideals on buggery and it's acceptance because of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 I say good riddance, justice Bork was a whole letter better choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CENTEXFAN Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 7 hours ago, AKA said: Ginsburg will never retire. I reckon she'll pass away before she'll step down. Will have to do a real life , " Weekend at Bernies" if she passes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueblue82 Posted April 4, 2018 Share Posted April 4, 2018 19 minutes ago, CENTEXFAN said: Will have to do a real life , " Weekend at Bernies" if she passes. I can see that. You on one side, Screamer on the other, walking her decrepit old carcass around. Question: she already LOOKS dead, so how are you gonna know when she really IS dead? Asking for a friend. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted April 5, 2018 Share Posted April 5, 2018 9 hours ago, Monte1076 said: Could you just imagine how much the media (and the left) would flip if there were more Supreme Court picks during this administration? Well get ready, because more than likely there will be at least two more .... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 On 4/4/2018 at 10:30 AM, Monte1076 said: Could you just imagine how much the media (and the left) would flip if there were more Supreme Court picks during this administration? On 4/4/2018 at 10:40 AM, AKA said: Oh man... it would be crazy. You just thought they had their knives out. It would go nuclear. Anarchy in the USA. VACANCY AT SUPREME COURT KENNEDY STEPS ASIDECONTENTIOUS FIGHT LOOMS Liberal Meltdown Over Kennedy Retirement... PANIC AT DNC... President Will Stick to 'List' of Conservative Replacements... MCCONNELL: Senate Will Vote In Fall... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 With any luck, President Trump will also replace Bryer and Ginsburg before he leaves office ... wouldn't that be something??!!!!! .... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte1076 Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 28 minutes ago, ScreamingEagle said: I think since it’s an election year we should wait till after November so that the voters have their say. Oh wait, I guess only Repubicans can steal a SCOTUS pick. Would you feel that way if Hillary Clinton were President? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 The big picture: What Anthony Kennedy's retirement means Quote Anthony Kennedy's retirement has given Republicans a once-in-a-generation shot at reshaping the Supreme Court. The big picture: Republicans already preserved a conservative seat by denying Merrick Garland a vote in 2016. Now they will likely be able to replace Kennedy's swing vote with a more reliable conservative, with immediate implications. Abortion: Kennedy voted with the court’s liberals to strike down some of the most aggressive efforts to limit women’s access to abortion. A more conservative court likely would be far more open to curtailing Roe v. Wade. LGBT rights: It’s hard to imagine the court ever overturning Kennedy’s historic 2015 decision on same-sex marriage. But it’s very easy to imagine a broader range of carve-outs and exemptions for people like the Christian baker who refused to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. Criminal justice: Kennedy was skeptical of the death penalty in certain cases, and had recently suggested that solitary confinement is unconstitutional. Between the lines: Sources close to the White House told Axios' Jonathan Swan that during the previous Supreme Court search Trump bonded with Thomas Hardiman, 52, and others in the White House were high on Raymond Kethledge, 51. And when Trump added Brett Kavanaugh, 53, to his list of possible choices last year, court watchers thought that was significant. State of play: The court's term starts in October, so Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has more incentive to get someone in place by then. Trump will "immediately begin" the selection process, he said today. Democrats can't block it by themselves: Republicans hold 51 seats, and only need 50 votes. Republicans to watch: Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, two generally pro-choice Republican senators. Democrats to watch: Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Joe Manchin of West Virginia all voted for Neil Gorsuch and are defending seats in states Trump won in 2016. The Merrick Garland precedent: Chuck Schumer wants to wait until after the election, citing 2016. Republicans say no thanks, arguing the precedent only applies to presidential election years. The bottom line: Trump has privately predicted he'll get four justices appointed in his first term. Ruth Bader Ginsburg is 85, Stephen Breyer is 79, Clarence Thomas is 70 and Samuel Alito is 68. Go deeper: Kennedy’s retirement preserves recent Trump wins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAWG91 Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 1 hour ago, ScreamingEagle said: I think since it’s an election year we should wait till after November so that the voters have their say. Oh wait, I guess only Repubicans can steal a SCOTUS pick. Apples and oranges argument. McConnell didnt allow Obama's pick to be considered because he was a lame duck president. Trump has at least 2 more years left and isnt a lame duck. But hey, yall have fun trying to make this argument. Prepare to fail (again.) 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. P Posted June 27, 2018 Share Posted June 27, 2018 Thanks to all of you who encouraged me to consider filibuster reform. It had to be done. — Senator Harry Reid (@SenatorReid) November 21, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now