Pedodent Biden broke federal law in nominating KBJ to the Supreme Court

Text Drivers are Killers said:
The constitution says "ALL". And yes, if congress writes a law it should stand until the public forces congress to repeal it.

You say courts don't rewrite laws???!!!! HAHAHAHA. They rewrite laws all the time, even the constitution. In pleyler v doe 1982 they "interpreted" the constitution to give illegal aliens free k-12. Fact is there is nothing in the constitution about educational rights for anyone let alone foreign invaders. They took their bribes from mexico and made it up. Happens all the time. THINK
Click to expand...
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,
Click to expand...
Obey express Law right-wingers don't merely practice the abomination of hypocrisy unto a God in border threads.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
If the GOP takes over congress in november they may be able to get this pedo-loving monster removed from the court. Plus she's stupid. I doubt she can even read.
Click to expand...

You appear to be a fucking idiot troll who has the least understanding of U.S. Constitutional law, and a hypocrite with a false equivalent source of nonsense too for the following reasons:

Republicans install the unqualified Amy Coney Barrett on the United States Supreme Court (a possible felony.)

Incensed Democrats pointed out the rank hypocrisy of Mitch McConnell’s caucus, noting that four years ago, McConnell refused to even give President Barack Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland a hearing. (Garland was nominated to replace Antonin Scalia.) Republicans have pathetically tried to argue that since they hold the Senate and the presidency, the precedent they set in 2016 does not apply.

But of course, that is simply an invitation for Democrats to ignore their concerns as soon as they hold the presidency and the Senate, something that could happen within just a few weeks if the Democrats do well in the 2020 presidential election.

Barrett’s experience consists of two years of private practice, fifteen years of teaching experience, and a short stint on an appellate court.

She has never tried a case, never argued an appeal, never argued before the United States Supreme Court, and did not become a judge until 2017. Furthermore, she has very little experience handling criminal cases.

In short, Barrett is not qualified to sit on the highest court in the land.

Barrett may be qualified to practice law, but she is definitely not an appropriate choice to succeed the late, great Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Republicans don’t care. Their goal is a highly partisan, militant, right wing Court that can even defy Chief Justice John Roberts on those occasions when Roberts does not want to be a judicial activist. With Barrett, they now have a five person bloc that can be expected to disregard precedent and established, settled law in favor of nonsensical right wing interpretations of the Constitution and federal law.
https://www.nwprogressive.org/weblo...rrett-on-the-united-states-supreme-court.html

Five Times Brett Kavanaugh Appears to Have Lied to Congress While Under Oath, a felony:

His role in accessing stolen documents: In 2002, a GOP aide on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Manuel Miranda, stole thousands of documents belonging to the committee’s Democratic staff. At the time, Kavanaugh was a White House lawyer working on judicial nominations, which included working alongside Miranda. In 2003, President Bush nominated Kavanaugh to his current position on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and his confirmation hearing was held in 2004—though he was not confirmed until two years later. During his 2004 hearing, Kavanaugh denied ever receiving any of the documents Miranda stole. Asked if he “ever come across memos from internal files of any Democratic members given to you or provided to you in any way?” he replied, “No.” In 2006, also under oath, he again denied ever receiving stolen documents.

But newly released documents show that Miranda had indeed sent Kavanaugh information from the stolen internal documents. The nominee continues to deny he knew the information was stolen. But he can no longer deny he received it."

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...rs-to-have-lied-to-congress-while-under-oath/

Neil Gorsuch’s Own Testimony Clearly Disqualifies Him
The nominee failed to outline even minimal concerns about the GOP’s judicial coup. (a possible felony)

Judge Neil Gorsuch knows full well that he is attempting to take a place on the Supreme Court that should have gone to another jurist, Judge Merrick Garland. Shortly after Donald Trump nominated him, Gorsuch called Garland “out of respect.” Later, Gorsuch described Garland to be an “outstanding judge.”

Yet, Gorsuch sacrificed his own self respect last week, during his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing. The nominee refused to answer a simple question about the shameful treatment of Garland, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit judge who President Obama’s nominated to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia, by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the cabal of lawless partisans who corrupted the confirmation process in 2016."

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/neil-gorsuchs-own-testimony-clearly-disqualifies-him/

American Bar Association heralds Jackson nomination to high court
The statement that lauds Ketanji Brown Jackson as well qualified to sit as a Supreme Court justice caps off what has been a week of hearings. (Legitimate in compliance with federal and U.S. Constitutional law).
WASHINGTON (CN) — Finding no evidence in the judge’s record to support accusations by Republicans that she is soft on crime, representatives of the American Bar Association commended Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s lofty qualifications as her Supreme Court confirmation hearing drew to a close Thursday.

“Well qualified” is the highest possible ranking given by the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, the body that evaluates the credential of nominees to the federal bench. Speaking before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the last day of Jackson’s nomination hearings, members of the attorney panel told lawmakers why that rating has been given to Jackson, who sits poised to become the first Black woman on the Supreme Court and first justice with experience as a federal public defender.

The legal organization reached out more than 2,000 members of the legal community and spoke with 250 attorneys and judges with connections to Jackson before coming to its gold-star rating of her nomination.

“What was remarkable is how consistent they were in their comments about how everyone gets a fair shake (before her),” said Jean Veta, a member of the bar group who evaluated Jackson’s nomination.

Veta said the ABA’s investigation found Jackson, currently a federal appellate judge, to be competent, with judicial integrity and the temperament needed to serve on the nation’s highest court.

“My conclusions are she has the highest degrees of professional competence and has the highest respect from the bench and the bar,” Veta said."
https://www.courthousenews.com/american-bar-association-heralds-jackson-nomination-to-high-court/

How's about that.
 
Last edited:
Text Drivers are Killers said:
HAHAHA. They don't interpret stuff, the USSC just invents "rights" like they did in roe v wade. They do it all the time. THINK
Click to expand...

Talk about someone ignoring the Constitution. The Constitution clearly states that rights exist that are not listed in the Constitution.
Article the eleventh... The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Click to expand...

The right wasn't invented by the court. It was simply recognized by the court.

Why do you support the rights of non citizens over the rights of citizens?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top