I think Shakespeare said (or Jack did), "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" I have nothing but disgust for the corruption that has wrapped around America like a huge boa constrictor. Even when we win we lose. Thanks to the lawyers. I don't know if we will ever prevail. And though I love and still support President Trump, he's just one man, and the enemy are legion, many of them in our ranks. I'm reflexively optimistic, but not when it comes to this awful political reality. Thank you, Roger, for documenting all of this and all your efforts to save America.
Demorats cry, "fairness, fairness", but they never abide by any fairness for Republicans. How can the lawful tolerate a union with peoples who are so lawless and intolerant?
I’m 65 yrs old and very sad to see what is happening in our country. Why are judges always against the rule of law when Trump is in office? Is Trump ok with Susie Wilds?
Rehberg v Paulk 566 US 356 (2012) correctly reports that until 1870s, or thereabouts, cases were brought by citizens, not "prosecutors".
Page 179 of Marbury v Madison 5 US 137 (1803) asks when judicial review is forbidden. Chief Justice John Marshall then proceeds to assume what he is trying to prove, which is not an implied power. The correct answer to Marshall's query is that judicial review is an implied power if and only if the judicial opinion is in the same equivalence class as the US Constitution, i.e. it is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive in relation to the US constitution. The same criteria applies to judicial or executive orders, Congressional acts, etc.
Therefore, the judge that ruled Lindsey Halligan was not eligible to proceed with prosecution must prove that this ruling was symmetric with respect to clause or clauses in the US Constitution. It is not, but the judge doesn't know that because law schools only teach heuristics of procedural due process, and not the social science of substantive due process.
Most SCOTUS opinions are forbidden, but that doesn't stop the justices from replacing rule of law with rule of case law.
Sad story about our current government. Thank God for President Donald J Trump!
MAGA!
I think Shakespeare said (or Jack did), "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers" I have nothing but disgust for the corruption that has wrapped around America like a huge boa constrictor. Even when we win we lose. Thanks to the lawyers. I don't know if we will ever prevail. And though I love and still support President Trump, he's just one man, and the enemy are legion, many of them in our ranks. I'm reflexively optimistic, but not when it comes to this awful political reality. Thank you, Roger, for documenting all of this and all your efforts to save America.
WELL SAID! Who has purchased Bondi? Is it Venezuela? I know they tried, but somebody is paying her inactions.
Dirty Democrats! We need to get more Republicans to fight against this scum and get rid of those who side with them!
That hate her because she is smart and beautiful. Can’t have that!
Demorats cry, "fairness, fairness", but they never abide by any fairness for Republicans. How can the lawful tolerate a union with peoples who are so lawless and intolerant?
I believe that they all hate President Trump so much, that they don’t care who they take down on the way to destroying him!
I’m 65 yrs old and very sad to see what is happening in our country. Why are judges always against the rule of law when Trump is in office? Is Trump ok with Susie Wilds?
Rehberg v Paulk 566 US 356 (2012) correctly reports that until 1870s, or thereabouts, cases were brought by citizens, not "prosecutors".
Page 179 of Marbury v Madison 5 US 137 (1803) asks when judicial review is forbidden. Chief Justice John Marshall then proceeds to assume what he is trying to prove, which is not an implied power. The correct answer to Marshall's query is that judicial review is an implied power if and only if the judicial opinion is in the same equivalence class as the US Constitution, i.e. it is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive in relation to the US constitution. The same criteria applies to judicial or executive orders, Congressional acts, etc.
Therefore, the judge that ruled Lindsey Halligan was not eligible to proceed with prosecution must prove that this ruling was symmetric with respect to clause or clauses in the US Constitution. It is not, but the judge doesn't know that because law schools only teach heuristics of procedural due process, and not the social science of substantive due process.
Most SCOTUS opinions are forbidden, but that doesn't stop the justices from replacing rule of law with rule of case law.