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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (91702)	12/21/2004 2:53:12 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793757

Well, there are nine justices on the SCOTUS, so at least 5 have to agree with the result to get a majority. Which means that it's never just "a" judge running wild. Not that I actually think any of the SCOTUS runs wild, per se. I don't always agree with the results but most of the time I can at least see how they got there. Calling it a night. Later.

To: TimF who wrote (91702)	12/21/2004 9:22:13 AM
From: haqihana	Respond to of 793757

Tim, All I ask of a judge, supreme or otherwise, is that they step down off that high horse, and use some horse sense instead.

To: TimF who wrote (91702)	12/21/2004 10:07:40 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793757

I recognize that there are real gaps and uncertainties but while sometimes a judge will have to do something in those gaps that doesn't mean that he has to or should decide that since the constitution is imperfect and not always 100% precise that he will make up new law whenever there is the slightest bit of justification for it. I seriously doubt the framers of the Constitution expected to have covered all the bases for all time. Jurisprudence like anything else would have to advance over time. The framers of the Constitution were people ahead of their time in terms of overall knowledge. They were educated in science and mathematics. They did not buy Creationism then and they wouldn't buy it today if they were around. If they were around today, they would still be ahead of their class in knowledge of science, philosophy, politics and economics. They were not Conservatives then and they wouldn't be Conservatives today if they were here.