Table of Laws Held Unconstitutional in Whole or in Part by the Supreme Cour t
formatting link
Even big stuff like the Voting Rights Act and The Civil Rights Act. One cru mmy little unconstitutional provision doesn't invalidate the whole law. The individual mandate provision is moot, not unconstitutional anyway.
Nothing in the Constitution says the people have a say in selecting an SC a ppointee. They had their chance by way of people they elect. The idiots wan t to run an unelectable wackadoodle for president, Hillary Clinton, they pa y the price.
As Trump pointed out in the debates, he will make over 300 federal judgeshi p appointments before his term is over. That's 300! A record! Why? Because the lazy Obama administration left 128 positions open when they left office . They were too lazy and negligent to fill them. That bit of information ma de the vegetable Biden go silent real fast- not a word to say about that.
Actually the Republican Senate in 2016 refused to let Obama to assign judges claiming that they should wait until after an election year to fill these positions.
Doesn't seem to be important now, does it?
There is a simple expression for this - Doublethink - and it was coined in the book 1984. You might want to read it...
crummy little unconstitutional provision doesn't invalidate the whole law. The individual mandate provision is moot, not unconstitutional anyway.
SC appointee. They had their chance by way of people they elect. The idiots want to run an unelectable wackadoodle for president, Hillary Clinton, the y pay the price.
eship appointments before his term is over. That's 300! A record! Why? Beca use the lazy Obama administration left 128 positions open when they left of fice. They were too lazy and negligent to fill them. That bit of informatio n made the vegetable Biden go silent real fast- not a word to say about tha t.
Republicans didn't take control until the 114th Congress. Looks like about the time people were becoming dissat isfied the with Democrat administrati on.
formatting link
And they didn't leave 128 Obama appointments unfilled, only his SC pick. The controlling party has a duty to its supporters, and using the discreti on with which they are empowered by law, they obviously seek to fulfill the ir duties. Nothing nefarious here.
If they had been honest back in 2016 "Nyah, nyah, we can stop you!" (Okay, a more polite statement would have come out) they could at least have been respected for being up front. Instead they come across as two-faced hypocrites regardless of their rationalizations.
rummy little unconstitutional provision doesn't invalidate the whole law. T he individual mandate provision is moot, not unconstitutional anyway.
appointee. They had their chance by way of people they elect. The idiots w ant to run an unelectable wackadoodle for president, Hillary Clinton, they pay the price.
hip appointments before his term is over. That's 300! A record! Why? Becaus e the lazy Obama administration left 128 positions open when they left offi ce. They were too lazy and negligent to fill them. That bit of information made the vegetable Biden go silent real fast- not a word to say about that.
You are a funny guy, really! I think you are a scream! You talk as if Cli nton was not a contender when she had more voters support her than Trump. It won't be long before we remove the silly electoral college and prevent f urther travesties of elections. One way or the other the electoral college is going down.
Then we will have Presidents selected by the voters in a fair manner and ev ery state will have equal representation in the Presidential campaign inste ad of the current race in a dozen key states while literally ignoring the o thers.
The only reason to support such an uneven-handed system is when it is unfai r in favor of one candidate or party over another. Not really much differe nt from gerrymandering.
--
Rick C.
- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
One crummy little unconstitutional provision doesn't invalidate the whole l aw. The individual mandate provision is moot, not unconstitutional anyway.
an SC appointee. They had their chance by way of people they elect. The idi ots want to run an unelectable wackadoodle for president, Hillary Clinton, they pay the price.
udgeship appointments before his term is over. That's 300! A record! Why? B ecause the lazy Obama administration left 128 positions open when they left office. They were too lazy and negligent to fill them. That bit of informa tion made the vegetable Biden go silent real fast- not a word to say about that.
ed
Once the Democrats control both chambers and the Presidency it won't be too difficult to add new seats to SCOTUS. Perfectly legal and entirely reason able.
Makes sense to me.
--
Rick C.
+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
crummy little unconstitutional provision doesn't invalidate the whole law. The individual mandate provision is moot, not unconstitutional anyway.
SC appointee. They had their chance by way of people they elect. The idiots want to run an unelectable wackadoodle for president, Hillary Clinton, the y pay the price.
eship appointments before his term is over. That's 300! A record! Why? Beca use the lazy Obama administration left 128 positions open when they left of fice. They were too lazy and negligent to fill them. That bit of informatio n made the vegetable Biden go silent real fast- not a word to say about tha t.
linton was not a contender when she had more voters support her than Trump. It won't be long before we remove the silly electoral college and prevent further travesties of elections. One way or the other the electoral colle ge is going down.
Be careful of what you want. If the president is elected by popular vote and the vote is close. Then the entire country is likely to be done over i nstead of just one state. And then it may end up with the speaker of the h ouse being president.
Dan
every state will have equal representation in the Presidential campaign ins tead of the current race in a dozen key states while literally ignoring the others.
air in favor of one candidate or party over another. Not really much diffe rent from gerrymandering.
ne crummy little unconstitutional provision doesn't invalidate the whole la w. The individual mandate provision is moot, not unconstitutional anyway.
n SC appointee. They had their chance by way of people they elect. The idio ts want to run an unelectable wackadoodle for president, Hillary Clinton, t hey pay the price.
dgeship appointments before his term is over. That's 300! A record! Why? Be cause the lazy Obama administration left 128 positions open when they left office. They were too lazy and negligent to fill them. That bit of informat ion made the vegetable Biden go silent real fast- not a word to say about t hat.
Clinton was not a contender when she had more voters support her than Trum p. It won't be long before we remove the silly electoral college and preve nt further travesties of elections. One way or the other the electoral col lege is going down.
e and the vote is close. Then the entire country is likely to be done over instead of just one state. And then it may end up with the speaker of the house being president.
I think that is an entirely manageable problem. First, a general election may not produce a majority, so there will need to either have an election m ethod that provides for second and third choices... which is enough differe nt that it is not likely to happen. Or... we would need to have a run off election which is not so unusual.
I'm ok with votes being second guessed in a close race. I'm not ok with th e present scheme where I don't live in a state where my vote matters... or is amplified by the unrepresented voters who's vote doesn't matter. I can pick one of several states to claim residency in and vote. With only a lit tle effort I can claim PA residency where my vote might actually matter. M aybe I'll do that.
I guess I need to get on that...
--
Rick C.
-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Absolutely false, on two counts: first, the Senate considers each appointment, perhaps in committee, or in open session; that consideration was never carried out. The Senate leadership abrogated their oaths to faithfully fulfill their duties. The Senate leadership (Mitch McConnell) never allowed a schedule for discussion on the subject, thus frustrating any act of the Senate (any kind of vote). Since there was no vote, "they", meaning the Senate, never expressed any such opinion. And it is not the Constitutional right of any Senator to refuse his duties when in office, because it abrogates his responsibilities to his constituents. The penalty, though, is impeachment (and I hold the people of Kentucky to be responsible for that not occurring.
Right means righteous behavior, and impeachable irresponsibility is not right.
I like that they nominated a woman, at least. Why not let women run the whole government? It would certainly leave men a lot more time to do engineering, or go fishing, or whatever.
If women enjoy paperwork so much (as that's what all management tends to amount to) then they should have it. I surely don't want the job.
Actually they did confirm him to the DC appellate court fairly recently, an d that's why the Obama administration picked him. A recent confirmation mea ns a new hearing is not required so the Senate approval is as fast as possi ble. The GOP is doing the same now with Barrett. Anything less than a year or so is not considered be out of compliance with the constitution.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.