Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.
Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!
The only ones who think that, are those who don"t understand what the Constitution actually says.at a time of growing scrutiny about the Supreme Court’s public legitimacy.
Searcher, but decades of Liberal justices and liberal rulings were probably just fine right?
..or are seeking to subvert it.
I was referring to those questioning the SC's legitimacy.Lotta peeps into that. R's, D's, religious fanatics, power crazed maniacs, the list goes on and on.
I was referring to those questioning the SC's legitimacy.
Of course the SC is legitimate. It's (the SC) creation is right there in Article 3 of the Constitution. How could it not be "legitimate"?
Okay.I was referring to those questioning the SC's legitimacy.
Of course the SC is legitimate. It's (the SC) creation is right there in Article 3 of the Constitution. How could it not be "legitimate"?
this thread needs some background music...
this thread needs some background music...
Then that person's opinion is not worth a plug nickel.Remember this is someone's opinion. Nothing more.
Scalia, of course makes my list.
Then that person's opinion is not worth a plug nickel.
Of late, he is one of the only Originalists in the bunch, and he's labeled as the worst one ever? How does one take an oath to "protect preserve and defend the Constitution", without supporting the original intent of the Document?
Anyone who doesn't support the original intent of the Document, obviously does not believe in the principles and ideals enshrined within it's pages.
...and therefor cannot possibly support the Constitution.
age is just about over
Looks to me like the DNC is beating the drum for their court-packing scheme.
House Judiciary Committee To Probe Supreme Court Corruption
They will hold a hearing on Dec. 8 investigating the lobbying campaign that led to allegations that Justice Samuel Alito leaked the outcome of a 2014 decision.
House Judiciary Committee To Probe Supreme Court Corruption
They will hold a hearing on Dec. 8 investigating the lobbying campaign that led to allegations that Justice Samuel Alito leaked the outcome of a 2014 decision.www.huffpost.com
Gee there seems to be a LOT more important case that leaked VERY recently.... The sound of silence.
I notice that you did not include the Constitution as being one of the thngs the decisions went against.issue increasingly bizarre and grotesque rulings in defiance of common sense, public opinion, Congress and the Presidency.
That's a good start. Now, when will they undo the previous half-century of progressive claptrap "advancement"?Donald Trump's three appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court launched a judicial revolution this year rolling back the past half-century of constitutional advancements.
No, what their decisions were based on was the Constitution. If the Constitution does not authorize a particular gov action, then no matter how many wish it to be so, it just ain't Constitutional.Some of the supremes seem to want us to go back in time to an America that existed only in their minds.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?