As the Lauren Boebert "SugarDaddyMeet.com-Gate" begins to expand...and it is going to expand a lot

Well, you're wildly incorrect.

 

Who the **** are you calling GOP?

I'm a libertarian amigo. Again: Life is not a binary solution set.

 

That's why we have elections.

 

This is literally the legal position of the network on their employee and what he says.

 

No, that's why we have constitutional rights that are not subject to the whims of representative government.

 

So what?

 

So what?
Are you not grasping that I can disagree with a post you make, and agree with another?

 

"The Constitution is what the judges say it is." --Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes

 

Yes, and . . . ?

 

Pointing out that biased partisans twist and corrupt things for their own gain does not illustrate that constitutional rights do not exist or only exist in the manner you wish them to.

 

So don't ask so what when I'm agreeing with you Newton.

 

I'll stick with Chief Justice Hughes, thanks.

 

As you wish.

 

I can't help it if you prefer partisanship.

That's sort of the point of calling them, and any who follow them, traitors.

 

Different thread topic

 

How do you figure the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS was speaking as a partisan?

 

Because he's claiming a document means whatever he says it means, and that's not at all how American Jurisprudence works.

 

He's merely capturing the essence of judicial review per Marbury v Madison.

 

Except that's not what judicial review entails.

Judicial review has very strict rules and it does not allow the scotus to simply make **** up.
You're still stuck with the words actually on the page and what they meant at that time.

 

I think you've got it wrong.
Judicial Review in the United States | Office of Justice Programs
https://www.ojp.gov › ncjrs › virtual-library › abstracts

by AB Rubin · Cited by 13 — The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the ...

". . . Still, where any actions by the executive or legislative branches are challenged in the courts, the judicial branch holds the ultimate authority in determining what is constitutional. . . . "

 

I had no idea that escorts were licensed.

 

Not all escorts are hookers, although I suppose many are.

Legalized Prostitution vs Registered Escort
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-registered-escort-how-benefit-hobby-olivia-larue/
Prostitution is legal in some counties of Nevada. Prostitution is a sexual act in exchange for payment. Escorts, however, are exchanging their company, ie companionship, for a fee. The exchange in no way guarantees any sexual acts will transpire. The client pays for a companion, what the companion does with the time she has been paid to supply is up to her.

 

Which doesn't give them unlimited authority to say that down really means up.
Again: Its not whatever the **** they say it is.

 

Actually, it is: "ultimate authority".
And: "The system, recognizing the inevitability of human frailty, provides that future judges may correct the errors of their predecessors."

 

Correcting an error in interpretation does not allow you to say down is up.
Judicial review has rules, they do not have plenary powers to write whatever they'd like.