Conservatives tell us they want a Judge who doesn't practice judicial activism

[archives]

and is a strict Constitutionalist, yet, they celebrate Judges who rule that Corporations have freedom of speech plus freedom of religion rights, and, Judges who completely ignore sections of the Constitution because they can't figure out what they mean. And that isn't advancing a novel interpretation, an activist approach?

It's tough to tell if the Judges are playing the partisan game to get appointed or if Conservatives really don't have any understanding of the Constitution beyond what they have heard others tell them is in the Constitution

 

[Airstrip One]

and is a strict Constitutionalist, yet, they celebrate Judges who rule that Corporations have freedom of speech plus freedom of religion rights, and, Judges who completely ignore sections of the Constitution because they can't figure out what they mean. And that isn't advancing a novel interpretation, an activist approach?

It's tough to tell if the Judges are playing the partisan game to get appointed or if Conservatives really don't have any understanding of the Constitution beyond what they have heard others tell them is in the Constitution

That line of approach to corporations goes back to the 19th Century. It might not make good sense, but, it's hardly new or innovative.

 

[archives]

That line of approach to corporations goes back to the 19th Century. It might not make good sense, but, it's hardly new or innovative.

But officially recognizing it legally isn't a conservative approach, it's direct judicial activism, which questions if conservatives actually understand what they say in regard to the Constitution and the Court

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

Where in the constitution does it say the opposite of what you claim? Pablo is right, if anything, this is a conservative approach and does hearken back to earlier times when corps were given much more power.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

wow, talk about hypocritical irony and cognitive dissonance

 

[Teflon Don]

and is a strict Constitutionalist, yet, they celebrate Judges who rule that Corporations have freedom of speech plus freedom of religion rights, and, Judges who completely ignore sections of the Constitution because they can't figure out what they mean. And that isn't advancing a novel interpretation, an activist approach?

It's tough to tell if the Judges are playing the partisan game to get appointed or if Conservatives really don't have any understanding of the Constitution beyond what they have heard others tell them is in the Constitution

Boring

 

[tsuke]

Where in the constitution does it say the opposite of what you claim? Pablo is right, if anything, this is a conservative approach and does hearken back to earlier times when corps were given much more power.

pablo, being an illegal alien, is probably talking about the chilean constitution.