Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (80810)	6/25/2004 8:43:33 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I guess it is a "response"; but as I said...it is not a defense. Its a refutation of a specific argument against my argument, in that sense it is a defense. Unconstitutional rulings can obviously be challenged. Supreme court rulings are not subject to review. In some cases even when there is no specific supreme court decision it is clear where the courts tend to stand on certain issues . Also I would probably lack standing to sue against these laws because I am unlikely to be run afoul of any of them as I am not a bigot and I don't run a business. I don't think it is right that ANY court (high or low) should make unconstitutional laws and rulings. What value is the Constitution, then? Rights become arbitrary and capricious. Constitutional rights are not always protected by the courts or anyone else, but the fact that such rights are sometimes respected, and when sometimes the court will protect them when they are not respected makes having such constitutional rights useful. Tim