advertisement


Post-Trump: III (decline, further tantrums, legal proceedings, book deals etc)

Popok now arguing that the reduction of the bond amount may indicate that the appeals court thinks Engoron made a mistake. So the $500 > $175 thing might be caused by statute of limitations issues.

 
Jubal said:
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.
Click to expand...
An interesting article in today's NYT on how US law should be interpreted:

www.nytimes.com

Opinion | Something Other Than Originalism Explains This Supreme Court

It’s actually traditionalist. Which is a good thing.
www.nytimes.com 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.
 
tones said:
An interesting article in today's NYT on how US law should be interpreted:

www.nytimes.com

Opinion | Something Other Than Originalism Explains This Supreme Court

It’s actually traditionalist. Which is a good thing.
www.nytimes.com 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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
tones said:
An interesting article in today's NYT on how US law should be interpreted:

www.nytimes.com

Opinion | Something Other Than Originalism Explains This Supreme Court

It’s actually traditionalist. Which is a good thing.
www.nytimes.com 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.
Click to expand...
The US Consition dates from Enlightenment days, as you said. What's now needed is a constitution that can stop the growing Endarkenment...
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Makes me glad we don’t have a written constitution, if it can be weaponised against the interests of the population in this way.
Click to expand...
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.

Example: Magna Carta of 1215 - provides fantastic precedent that cuts across, and still- informs, even if superseded. One clause in particular, the magnificent 'to None will we sell, to none delay, Right nor Justice.'

That's a fantastically-concise precedent (and limitation on the King's power) - yet equally, it is a demand that the [Government] acts in such capacity to and for All, equally -regardless of status. Not a written constitution - but, 799yrs of Precedent.


sorry for the total aside...
 
No Constitution, whether embodied in 799 years of precedent, written on parchment, or engraved on granite and filled in with gold, can stand against a governing class that becomes heedless of it. You have the rights that the key people in power now agree that you have, no more no less. If they are very bad, things will be bad until they are replaced, with better, one way or another.
 
The image of Biden tied up was clearly a JPG or similar, made into a film wrap, then applied to the rear tailgate of a pickup truck. How much would this actually COST?

I would wager that the person who got this made and applied to their truck is the same person who whines about the price of 'gas' or of the weekly shop ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top