• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

SCOTUS decisions

Does Junebug consider himself “elite law”?
 
Weird. Junebug assured us that the judiciary would expedite these matters to ensure the house could effectively obtain necessary information.
 
DeaconSig said:
Weird. Junebug assured us that the judiciary would expedite these matters to ensure the house could effectively obtain necessary information.
Click to expand...

I can't tell if Junebug is playing with us or if he legitimately doesn't understand the conservative judiciary is crooked.
 
Junebug said:
Did the other cases involve impeachment proceedings?
Click to expand...

So your argument is that the courts that have slow-played rulings to benefit Trump would hurry up on rulings that could hurt Trump.

You’re not making sense, Junebug.
 
Junebug said:
The courts haven’t slow played anything. There simply hasn’t been a compelling claim for exigency in anything else. The impeachment proceedings would have provided that.

You don’t get to withdraw subpoenas and then complain about how the courts wouldn’t have moved fast anyway. If you short circuited the process, that’s on you.

Don’t blame the SCOTUS for your party’s strategic blunders.
Click to expand...

Lol
 
Junebug said:
I’m a card-carrying member, and I have been since law school.

In law school, it was great to find an originalist group in a place where liberal ideology is pushed from the top down. As far as their efforts in identifying and pushing through originalist jurists, they’ve done a tremendous job. Gorsuch has been great so far, and Kavanaugh was great on paper (even though I think he shouldn’t have been confirmed based on his testimony). With a few exceptions that I know about, they are doing a great job on the lower courts as well. Every now and again I read about some clown who is being pushed by them, but I think these cases are the exception, not the rule.

One thing I don’t like is that they are pushing very young lawyers onto the bench. Law isn’t rocket science, but it requires a great deal of practical wisdom to be a good judge. Most people don’t have that from just being smart. Generally, you have to have been around the block a few times, and most people under 40 just don’t have the kind of experience you need.
Click to expand...

Junebug, the Federalists aren’t looking for judges with experience. They don’t need experience to simply rule how they’re told.

The Federalists are simply looking for judges who pledge loyalty and will hold lifetime appointments for as long as possible.

I’m really starting to think you aren’t in on the game here. Originalism is just a gambit concocted in the 1980s to keep the clock from moving and reinforce as many norms as possible from the 1780s and 1880s.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
Junebug, the Federalists aren’t looking for judges with experience. They don’t need experience to simply rule how they’re told.

The Federalists are simply looking for judges who pledge loyalty and will hold lifetime appointments for as long as possible.

I’m really starting to think you aren’t in on the game here. Originalism is just a gambit concocted in the 1980s to keep the clock from moving and reinforce as many norms as possible from the 1780s and 1880s.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the original judges didn’t have experience as judges in the US system either, so it makes sense that originalists wouldn’t care about experience.
 
birdman said:
To be fair, the original judges didn’t have experience as judges in the US system either, so it makes sense that originalists wouldn’t care about experience.
Click to expand...

The court system didn’t start with the United Stares. I bet a lot of them had experience in other judiciaries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top