Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Today's Posts Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 06-27-2018, 10:06 AM   #33
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
If that was really the case we wouldn't need judges. Hell, think of the savings.
Judges resolve disputes--disputes between government entities, disputes between private entities, and disputes between private and government entities. Judges are referees in a dispute, they are not to be an opposing party in a dispute. Referees are bound by rules. If there were no rules which bound and guided a referee, a judge could not be impartial. The judge would become a party to the dispute. The verdict would be in favor of the side whose argument the judge preferred, rather than on the side whose argument was consistent with fundamental rules.

This all is particularly true of a SCOTUS Justice since it affects the supreme law of the land. Which is why I said that "Constitutional Judges are to apply the law, as it is written, no matter how inconvenient that might be for some parties in the dispute." When a Supreme Court decision is based on a majority preference rather than on the law, the law is abridged. In effect, a new law, written by judges, not by Congress, is created and becomes precedent for further judicial mischief and destruction of the Constitution. Which further vitiates the true role of judge as referee bound by rules, and turns judges into legislators who create rules rather than being bound by them.

And this fits nicely into what role a judge plays in Progressive jurisprudence. The Progressive judge becomes an added party to the dispute, on the side of the progressive argument rather than a referee, thus further advancing Progressive rule of unlimited government power. The Progressive judge, in effect, becomes redundant, an addition to one side of the dispute. And this fits well into your statement that "we wouldn't need judges. Hell, think of the savings."

Our constitutional system requires judges who can finally and impartially resolve a dispute by applying the law. Progressive political ideology has no need of judges. Government can do as it wishes. There are no rules to which it must adhere. There is no need for judges.
detbuch is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com