Can someone please lock up the orange shit gibbon.
Quite a lot of the US justice system is trying.
Can someone please lock up the orange shit gibbon.
Quite a lot of the US justice system is trying.
It's very trying.
(the peasants are revolting)
An interesting article in today's NYT on how US law should be interpreted:The merry go round of US law is intriguing and frustrating. It also seems spectacularly ineffective at getting to the bottom of matters. The hierarchy of courts is mythical it seems. No doubt eventually someone will decide his number is up and convict him of something on a technicality. Maybe.
Seem? Strikes me the appointment process is politics too. However, it all makes for sporting, if depressing, viewing. I’m a lightweight observer though. Threads like this are useful for the due diligence of others.An interesting article in today's NYT on how US law should be interpreted:
Opinion | Something Other Than Originalism Explains This Supreme Court
It’s actually traditionalist. Which is a good thing.www.nytimes.com
It's all very nice to have a written Constitution,defining what the country is all about, but the US's is now 250 years old, and times and ideas have changed, as have technologies. Things that were inconceivable in the late 18th century are now commonplace as are the changes in ideas as to what is and isn't appropriate. The US Constitution is very much steeped in Enlightenment ideas, as the Founding Fathers were all very much Enlightenment gentlemen of means. These were fused with the common law/equity principles of English law.
How then should on interpret this venerable document? To me, the idea of interpreting it as it was in the 18th century seems utterly ridiculous. But then, the US Supreme Court seems to act the way so many courts do - decide who deserves to win and then look for an excuse to justify it. A problematic position in a polarised country, where the judges seem equally polarised.
In the USA, that it most certainly is!Strikes me the appointment process is politics too.
The US Consition dates from Enlightenment days, as you said. What's now needed is a constitution that can stop the growing Endarkenment...An interesting article in today's NYT on how US law should be interpreted:
Opinion | Something Other Than Originalism Explains This Supreme Court
It’s actually traditionalist. Which is a good thing.www.nytimes.com
It's all very nice to have a written Constitution,defining what the country is all about, but the US's is now 250 years old, and times and ideas have changed, as have technologies. Things that were inconceivable in the late 18th century are now commonplace as are the changes in ideas as to what is and isn't appropriate. The US Constitution is very much steeped in Enlightenment ideas, as the Founding Fathers were all very much Enlightenment gentlemen of means. These were fused with the common law/equity principles of English law.
How then should on interpret this venerable document? To me, the idea of interpreting it as it was in the 18th century seems utterly ridiculous. But then, the US Supreme Court seems to act the way so many courts do - decide who deserves to win and then look for an excuse to justify it. A problematic position in a polarised country, where the judges seem equally polarised.
Makes me glad we don’t have a written constitution, if it can be weaponised against the interests of the population in this way.
I agree with that; that a bit of flexibility and a whole lot of precedent, provide a very different landscape for ascertaining ' what is right in context' - far-beyond the possibilities of a fixed-but-partial set of rules, that everyone then sets-out to 'game' - very much in the same way that playing 'Monopoly' always ends up in tears.Makes me glad we don’t have a written constitution, if it can be weaponised against the interests of the population in this way.
Class act from Trump, inciting indirectly again. They can see the plate so if it’s illegal then have at the moron who thinks that’s an appropriate message.Trump posts video that shows image of Biden tied up in the back of a truck
.
Piece Of Total Utter Shit.Netanyahu grade incitement, how the piece of shit, sorry, ex POTUS isn't locked up is beyond reason.