0
rushmc

This Time the Laws and Constitution Win! Obama looses

Recommended Posts

Quote

You think being an "expert" in constitutional law would have helped....



Got nothing to do with me

But the judges did make a ruling now didnt they
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

if it stands, it means hundreds of decisions issued by the board over more than a year are invalid. It also would leave the five-member labor board with just one validly appointed member, effectively shutting it down.



And thus resulting in an additional miscarriage of justice. Decisions to play fast and loose with the rules have consequences beyond the initial decision.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

if it stands, it means hundreds of decisions issued by the board over more than a year are invalid. It also would leave the five-member labor board with just one validly appointed member, effectively shutting it down.



And thus resulting in an additional miscarriage of justice. Decisions to play fast and loose with the rules have consequences beyond the initial decision.



I just read an appeal is coming

To the SC i am guessing

How long will that take?

I am guessing they will refuse to hear it and let it stand (maybe hoping is a better word)
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Decisions to play fast and loose with the rules have consequences beyond the initial decision.

Which decisions to play fast and loose are you referring to? The decision to keep the senate "in session" with a sham campaign to have one senator come in every couple of days, gavel the session "open" and then close it 30 seconds later and go home (and yes I know that both sides have done this)? The decision to use "secret holds" to prevent a vote on a nominee, effectively blocking the ability of departments to function? Or the decision to treat the Senate as if it was in recess (which it was in effect if not in name) and proceed with the appointments?

Don
_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure about what this could ever possibly have to do with you...I was simply making the point the POTUS IS a constitutional law professor.

Yet he says things like this:
"When Congress refuses to act and as a result hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them," said the President in January 2012. "I will not stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people they were elected to serve.""

Uphold and defend my ass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Not sure about what this could ever possibly have to do with you...I was simply making the point the POTUS IS a constitutional law professor.

Yet he says things like this:
"When Congress refuses to act and as a result hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them," said the President in January 2012. "I will not stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people they were elected to serve.""

Uphold and defend my ass.



My bad
I misunderstood your post
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Which decisions to play fast and loose are you referring to? The decision to keep the senate "in session" with a sham campaign to have one senator come in every couple of days, gavel the session "open" and then close it 30 seconds later and go home (and yes I know that both sides have done this)? The decision to use "secret holds" to prevent a vote on a nominee, effectively blocking the ability of departments to function? Or the decision to treat the Senate as if it was in recess (which it was in effect if not in name) and proceed with the appointments?



Those are the rules. They have been used for a long time. As stated in the article, Democrats have done it, too. And something strange happened – previous Presidents realized that they had no choice and so did not do things like ignore the whole “advice and consent” of the Senate thing.

Yep. It’s action resulted in “effectively blocking” the ability of the departments to function. Then, apparently, the President found the Constitution to be an unnecessary legal barrier and ignored it.

The President decided that he’s da man and screw the Senate and the Constitution. He’ll do what he wants. And he did it and he shouldn’t have and now it’s a double mess. The Senate played fast and tight with the rules. Look at it as the Senate deciding to arbitrarily put stop signs every half mile on a deserted highway. Then somebody decides to say, “Fuck this” and runs through them and broadsides a bus.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The President decided that he’s da man and screw the Senate and the Constitution. He’ll do what he wants.



I think that's a bit of an extreme descriptor for a level head. He engaged in slick parliamentary maneuvering, just as legislators and executives do at every level of government in this country, and every other democratic country. They made a calculation, they rolled the dice, and they lost. In my perfect hindsight, their legal analysis was shoddy; but whatever. But let's just keep this in proper perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
from article
"The three-judge panel, all appointed by Republican presidents, flatly rejected arguments from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, which claimed the president has discretion to decide that the Senate is unavailable to perform its advice and consent function"

President Obama no doubt will dis these judges in the next State of the Union address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

"Dis" is short for disrespect or maybe disregard.



:|
You don't say.


Sorry. I was only trying to give you the benefit of the doubt in your not knowing the definition of "dis". I really was trying to not misinterpret your comment as an attempt at race-baiting. On the other hand, you could have, for some unknown other reason, only been informing us how Obama pronounces "th".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0