LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksShow us where the SCOTUS needs Congressional authorization to do their job. If that were true, then there would be an issue with separation of powers.Originally Posted by The Wyrd of Gawd
Show us where the SCOTUS needs Congressional authorization to do their job. If that were true, then there would be an issue with separation of powers.
"The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents — number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. It’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic!" - Barack Hussein Obama
Guru
Don't all conservatives now the Constitution by memory?
Try Article 3 Section 2 = In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A3Sec1
Read the text of any public law and you will see that Congress authorizes the courts to review it. Without that authorization the courts have no jurisdiction. http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php
Last edited by The Wyrd of Gawd; Apr 10 2012 at 11:59 PM.
Contributor
Obama is thinking that people are not remembering him that's why he is spearheading the flack news
Guru
Stand up for the profession, Bulls. I assume you agree with his statements on the Supreme Court. How dare they strike down a law passed by an great majority of seven in the House of Representatives.
The thread might be trolling but your knee-jerk reaction to protect President Obama is ludicrous.
It seems to me that if Congress can prevent the SCOTUS from making a Constitutional determination, then separation of powers is being messed with.
Also, 26 States are challenging Obamacare. Wouldn't this constitute the States being a Party, and put this under original jurisdiction?
"The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents — number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. It’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic!" - Barack Hussein Obama
The States brought this forward, did they not? Or am I not reading the Constitution?
We are not the product of our environment, we are the result of ourselves.
Guru
While I do, this thread has nothing to do with that.
You assume incorrectly, of course. But that certainly doesn't stop you from assuming.I assume you agree with his statements on the Supreme Court. How dare they strike down a law passed by an great majority of seven in the House of Representatives.
What was knee-jerk about it? I merely pointed out that the post I quoted was nonsense. Obama went to Harvard, a school with a historically very high Bar passage rate, so assuming his Bar exam score was "low" is ridiculous. Furthermore, people who pass the Bar do not get their scores, meaning the poster was ignorant of how the Bar exam even works.The thread might be trolling but your knee-jerk reaction to protect President Obama is ludicrous.
I criticize Obama and in particular his big-government concepts quite frequently. However, I also criticize people with "Obama Derangement Syndrome," who are so blinded by hate they can't even get basic facts right, and who do far more harm than good to the cause of libertarians like me, who oppose big government on rational, sound, grounds.
But while we're on the topic of "knee-jerk", here you are again lawyer-hating for no discernible reason other than that it gets your jollies.
You're incorrect. The part of the Constitution you quote refers to Congress regulating or making exceptions to the fact that, in most types of federal cases, the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction, as opposed to original jurisdiction. Congress can regulate, for example, that certain types of cases which otherwise would start in District court and work their way up should start in Supreme Court.
That is what the Congress can "regulate" with respect to the Court's jurisdiction.
You also ignore the fact that the clause clearly maintains the Supreme Court's "appellate jurisdiction" in all other types of cases (besides the types they just listed). Again - the only thing Congress can regulate is whether the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction or appellate jurisdiction; either way the Supreme Court can eventually hear the case under its jurisdiction.
Much more important on the jurisdiction of the federal courts, including SCOTUS, is the first sentence of Article III, Section 2, in which the Constitution says quite clearly, "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made"
That means that the federal courts, and in particular the Supreme Court, have jurisdiction over any case in which the parties disagree about a law or Constutional concept. In this sentence, the Constitution grants the federal courts the power of judicial review. A concept which, by the way, predates our Constitution by hundreds of years.
Last edited by BullsLawDan; Apr 11 2012 at 07:08 AM.
twitter.com/BullsLawDan <~ My Twitter (may be NSFW). Follow me!
"But it wasn't until he met his beautiful wife that he learned using logic and reason isn't enough. You have to be a dick to everyone who doesn't think like you." - South Park on Richard Dawkins
Guru
I think Obama just has a very limited understanding of constitution. When he was a senior lecturer or adjunct professor at the University of Chicago Law School his course simply covered voting rights, which is not even a constitutional right. As far as I know that is the only course he ever taught
Last edited by jackdog; Apr 11 2012 at 07:14 AM.
"America is more than just a place...it's an idea. It's the only country founded on an idea. 'Our rights come from nature and God, not government.' We promise equal opportunity, not equal outcomes." - Paul Ryan
Guru
I don't know what his understanding of the Constitution is, but it's likely far better than the average American (who, by the way, cannot name even one Supreme Court justice). It's really, really ridiculous to say he has a "very limited" understanding of it based upon political statements.
As far as his statements here? He's pandering to his base. It's what (*)(*)(*)(*)ty politicians do. If you can't see that, you're as much of a rube to his carny routine as his supporters.
twitter.com/BullsLawDan <~ My Twitter (may be NSFW). Follow me!
"But it wasn't until he met his beautiful wife that he learned using logic and reason isn't enough. You have to be a dick to everyone who doesn't think like you." - South Park on Richard Dawkins
obama cant be a lawyer, he lies too much...
With their infernal racial set-asides, racial quotas, and race norming, liberals share many of the Klan's premises. The Klan sees the world in terms of race and ethnicity. So do liberals! Indeed, liberals and white supremacists are the only people left in America who are neurotically obsessed with race. Conservatives champion a color-blind society. -- Ann Coulter
I am jack's righteous indignation....
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks