TODAY'S SCOTUS DECISION.....I'M NOT A LAWYER BUT THIS MAY GIVE US SOME HOPE
(thefederalist.com)
Comments (14)
sorted by:
Probably threatened. These people are vicious.
I fail to see the "hope" here. The hope is that the legislature can change laws? The uniparty with D majority has been "legislating" through the courts and activist judges for some time. Now that they have majorities and have stolen the executive branch, they may not even need to.
The Supreme Court is on paper "6-3" - in practice, accounting for owned/controlled Chief Justice, 5-4 - and still refused to even hear a single case on the greatest travesty of our democracy in at least 100 years.
This article is certainly "true" in the sense that the facts as stated are correct, but it is also "irrelevant" in today's situation.
The top focus of everyone here must be taking personal responsibility and doing everything you can to get elections back. Without restoring elections, you won't be picking these legislators to magically restore the republic...
I've been trying to tell people for 30 years that SCOTUS was never meant to be the final word on the US Constitution. Their opinion can be overturned or simply ignored. They don't have the powers of arrest nor do they have an enforcement arm. In truth their opinion is no more or no less important than the average citizen's. The US Constitution isn't a complicated document. It was written so that the common man could understand it.
True, but this article contends (as I interpret it) that the legislative branch and/or executive branch can offset or ameliorate bad SCOTUS precedent. Well, that isn't going to work in this specific case, is it? Both are controlled by the deep state, so don't take a lot of solace from this article.
I don't take solace from any article. I simply stated fact. When SCOTUS ruled against President Andrew Jackson he simply said, "Let them enforce it." Obviously they can't can't. Yes according to the Constitution the legislature can override SCOTUS. Unfortunately the people we have elected are also brain dead to the constitution. As evidenced by the laws they have passed. Actually there is a legal way that citizens can fight unconstitutional acts or laws. It's been quietly suppressed but it's there to be used. It's a writ of quo warranto and it puts the burden on them to prove they have the delegated authority to use their powers.
That article fails to bring any hope whatsoever. Instead it is the exact opposite.
The article contends that their is a balance in maintaining what is Constitutional between the legislative and executive branches. So when both those branches are captured and operating unconstitutionally, exact where is the protection for the Constitution?
We have literally witnessed treason committed on a wide-scale with the last Presidential election and NOTHING has been done about it other than the SC saying it is now moot to pursue because it is done.
This article basically states it is now up to the legislative and executive branches to correct it - the very branches that benefitted from the act of treason.