Speaking of impeachment.........

what I said....... kinda......!

 

OK

 

nope, if the rules allow it, then they can do it

 

I know that is what leftists think. Typical.

 

Not just mine. It's shared by RW hero Big Al.

Alan Dershowitz Says Texas Abortion Law Is Unconstitutional, Will Be Struck Down by SCOTUS
https://www.newsweek.com/alan-dersh...onstitutional-will-struck-down-scotus-1625687

Which brings me back to my point. The conservatives allowed an unconstitutional law to stand.

 

that is what republicans did, so what is fair for one, is fair for the other

 

No, it's not. They didn't advocate for expanding the number of justices. Don't be silly.

 

it should be, but so many republican activist judges, it may not be

 

yes they did, they first denied Obama his pick, said the voters shoudl decide in an election year, then let Trump pick

and they changed the votes from 60 to 50

they said the rules allow it, so its ok

 

Now you're just talking crazy.

 

Denying a pick is not expanding the number of justices on the court.
Changing the votes, following Democrat precedent, is not expanding the number of justices on the court.

You have a hard time with facts.

 

It's just fact.

 

I am pro abortion mostly because the democrats abort their future voters. Too bad the country has to bring in foreign labor because we abort our own future generation.
How many Elon Musks and Bill Gates not to mention scientists and over achievers have gone down the crapper?
Lastly, the law was "no abortion after a fetal hear beat occurs" which is at six weeks or somewhere around there.

Why is the guys on this board all about abortion? Yeah, I get it. Now willing to take responsibility for getting some chick pregnant, eh?

 

nope, but the rules allowed it

even though republicans knew it was wrong... they did it... cause the rules allowed it

if the rules allow dems to add seats, they should do it

 

That doesn't refute my point. Thanks. Does Republicans doing something Democrats did suddenly make it wrong, lol?

 

wrong is wrong no mater who does it

what dems did for the lower court judges was wrong, but the rules allowed it
what repubs did for the SC judges was wrong, but the rules allowed it

 

Whether the court eventually strikes down Roe or not as Roe currently stands the TX law is in violation of it.

 

I agree, it is, but there are so man far right activist judges that don't care, they will just approve it anyways, or like in this case, they will just not rule on it, leaving it stand

 

Fake News. The UNELECTED Supreme Court does not have that power, because We The People have not granted it to them, to simply remove laws passed by the ELECTED Legislatures and signed by the ELECTED President. Your problem is that you want to live under an unelected nine member tribunal, drawn from the most privileged among us, who graduated from one of three universities and you want them to have unchecked authority to implement your will backed by the force of law, rather than live in a Constitutional Liberal Democracy where All Power resides in We The People. There are many dictatorships in the world, perhaps you should find one you can support and move there. Here in the US we have the world's longest lasting Free Democracy in existence today, and we aren't going to adopt the inferior system you are demanding.

https://www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-could-not-block-texas-fetal-heartbeat-law-opinion-1625666

You are demanding they be impeached for not arrogating authority We The People withheld from them. Your beef isn't actually with them, your beef is with us for insisting on living in a Representative Democracy rather than a 9 member authoritarian council.

Planned Parenthood normally would ask the Court to force the attorney general not to enforce the law, when the law FORBIDS the attorney general from enforcing. Now Free Texans can, but unless you have a time machine, you do not know which Free Texans will sue abortion providers. So the dummies at Planned Parenthood sued Judge Jackson of Tyler, Texas, under the theory that someday, someone might bring such a case to his court, demonstrating a shocking level of ignorance by their legal team. Here is what you need to keep straight that will untangle your blind confusion:

• It is the LEGISLATURE that proscribes FUTURE behavior.
• It is the JUDICIARY that applies the law and the constitution to PAST facts.

In spite of these obvious flaws PP managed to find a robed mouth-breathing idiot in Austin dumb enough to rule that PP could sue Judge Jackson and even dumb enough to forbid the Judge Jackson "from even accepting a case emanating from S.B. 8".

The appeal was always a loser.

Are you following?

In order to issue a stay, it must be likely that PP's position would carry the day and that simply is not the case.

You seem to think that they have a giant eraser than allows the unelected body to erase statutes passed by the Elected branches, and this power simply does not exist in our system.

 

Still can't see the difference between replacing a judge and packing the court. Figures.

 

Disregarding that your post has nothing to do with the thread it would still be wrong but I guess you just needed to get that out of your system........again. Still wrong. There was no fraud......from the left, that is.

 

replacing the judges with only 50 votes vs 60 is packing the courts, the 60 votes kept the courts more in the middle

can't help it if you can't or refuse to see that

 

No. Replacing a judge is NOT "packing the court". That has a very specific meaning. I get it, though, the leftists like Rachel Madcow told you to say this, even though it's wrong, so here you are saying it.

 

yep, it is, it packing the court with far right judges

stop telling lies about me, I watch cnn, not msnbc or fox

 

Actually, that would have been more true years ago. But, now the CNN's, ABC's, etc. have giant conglomerations that own them with Globalist agendas. Their ratings matter less than their content as the parent companies make a ton off other things like movies, appliances, etc. It's why CNN is allowed to air terrible shows that few watch, but they keep their jobs.