Message boards :
Politics :
Corporations are people?
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 . . . 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 . . . 19 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
The Supreme Court holds the power to interpret laws and declare them unconstitutional under the principle of judicial review. While Congress doesn't technically have the power to overrule a Supreme Court decision, it can take actions to lessen, or even negate, the effect of a court ruling. Congress can thereby render the court's interpretation obsolete, either by passing a new law or amending the old law to better achieve its original intent. |
Batter Up Send message Joined: 5 May 99 Posts: 1946 Credit: 24,860,347 RAC: 0 |
Congress can thereby render the court's interpretation obsolete, either by passing a new law or amending the old law to better achieve its original intent.If they did that the new law would be struck down 9-0. Anyway congress knows better than to try it as it would lead to a "constitutional crises". |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
United States Constitution wrote: the argument of when life starts is one of the oldest arguments in human history. it is not going to be decided in this thread. your view is contrary to nature or if you prefer casual agents design since over 70% of fertilized eggs are never implanted in the uterine wall or are at least naturally miscarried during the next menstrual cycle. you are saying that we are either in left field or right field while you are center field. the problem with that is that you are playing baseball when everyone else is playing football. as to you mistranslating the first amendment it was purposely written in plain english that anyone with a 5th grade reading skill would not miss interpret it. your translation left out any thing having to do with the "free practice of" why is that? |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
Congress can thereby render the court's interpretation obsolete, either by passing a new law or amending the old law to better achieve its original intent.If they did that the new law would be struck down 9-0. Anyway congress knows better than to try it as it would lead to a "constitutional crises". ============================================================== Congress can't eliminate court precedent. While Congress may pass a new law that changes the impact of the court's decision, the precedent remains in effect. For example, in 1986 the Supreme Court ruled that a federal civil rights law that protected people with disabilities from discrimination did not apply to the airline industry. However, Congress meant for that law to apply to airlines. Congress responded to the decision by passing a new law, the Air Carrier Access Act, that applied specifically to air travel. While this had the effect of protecting the rights of disabled people traveling by air, it didn't overturn the court's decision. The earlier law still doesn't apply to the airline industry. =================================================================== as you can see it has happened before without causing a constitutional crisis it will happen again it is part and parcel of the checks and balances that our constitution was created with |
Batter Up Send message Joined: 5 May 99 Posts: 1946 Credit: 24,860,347 RAC: 0 |
the argument of when life startsThe sperm and egg are alive the question is when do they become human. For example, in 1986 the Supreme Court ruled that a federal civil rights law that protected people with disabilities from discrimination did not apply to the airline industry.I'm not familiar with that case but it most likely was a technicality, like overturning the "net neutrality" rules. Congress can't make a law telling the family who ownes Hobby Lobby what they should believe. Are you suggesting the thought police should be legal? This is all academic because the Republicans will control both houses in January. |
Мишель Send message Joined: 26 Nov 13 Posts: 3073 Credit: 87,868 RAC: 0 |
I'm not familiar with that case but it most likely was a technicality, like overturning the "net neutrality" rules. Congress can't make a law telling the family who ownes Hobby Lobby what they should believe. You should read what this bill actually does. It does not tell the Hobby Lobby owners what to believe, it amends or specifies in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that for profit organizations cannot use it to claim religious exemption. This way it would not overrule the SCOTUS decision because that ruling was based on the current interpretation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. By changing what that act does, they simply make the SCOTUS decision obsolete. |
Мишель Send message Joined: 26 Nov 13 Posts: 3073 Credit: 87,868 RAC: 0 |
Perhaps that how it works in Europe. Not The US. Then do tell, how does it work in the US? Does congress not have the power to update, remove or amend laws? |
Мишель Send message Joined: 26 Nov 13 Posts: 3073 Credit: 87,868 RAC: 0 |
Perhaps that how it works in Europe. Not The US. Yeah but this does not involve a constitutional issue. This isn't about the First ammendment, this is about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, its not part of the constitution so congress can do with it whatever it wants to do with it. |
Мишель Send message Joined: 26 Nov 13 Posts: 3073 Credit: 87,868 RAC: 0 |
Negative. But of course, you studied American Constitutional Law in College. You don't need to have studied US constitutional law to know that the RFRA is not part of the constitution but is simply a federal law that applies to other federal law. The kind of law congress can adapt, expand, decrease or amend in any way it likes. Of course, the SCOTUS can later on decide that what congress did in some other way is unconstitutional, but the act of changing aspects of the RFRA is not unconstitutional. |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
In order to understand American Constitutional Law you must understand the people have the last word, no damn court system, elected, or president with a pen and phone. Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick... |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
In order to understand American Constitutional Law you must understand the people have the last word, no damn court system, elected, or president with a pen and phone. NO JOY--NO JOY--NO JOY! Incorrect and a quote from a founder to prove it..."Here, sir, the people govern; here they act by their immediate representatives."~ Alexander Hamilton Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick... |
Batter Up Send message Joined: 5 May 99 Posts: 1946 Credit: 24,860,347 RAC: 0 |
By changing what that act does, they simply make the SCOTUS decision obsolete.You people are barking up the wrong tree blinded by your agenda. The true evils are the Wal*Marts who supply no health coverage. Would you rather Hobby Lobby not pay for three items or drop all health care? That is what you are demanding whether you know it or not. The Hobby Lobbies are learning no good deed goes unpunished. The Constitution has 'The Last Word', unless Amended (long hard process).The states can call for a constitutional convention where amendments can be made on the fly. There has only been one but it is on the books. Amendments are hard but they can be quick. |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
the argument of when life startsThe sperm and egg are alive the question is when do they become human. no the government cant and shouldn't even try to tell anyone what to believe but they can and should make perfectly clear where their rights end and other peoples rights begin i have read that the owners of hobby lobby start all managerial meetings with a prayer that is not them exercising their right to practice it is a blatant attempt to force their employees to to practice the same they are a for profit business as such they cannot discriminate in their hiring practices based on religion and forcing their employees to involve themselves in their prayers or involve their employees in their religious practices such as not taking day after pills. |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
I'm not familiar with that case but it most likely was a technicality, like overturning the "net neutrality" rules. Congress can't make a law telling the family who ownes Hobby Lobby what they should believe. Actually it does work that way in the US. I learned that in 7th grade government class. |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
Perhaps that how it works in Europe. Not The US. Congress can change either the law in question or other law to render the decision moot though the precedent remains. |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
Negative. But of course, you studied American Constitutional Law in College. All law has standing until the SCOTUS deems it unconstitutional this decision now has standing in law but any change in the law or new law may render this standing obsolete, because the decision of the SCOTUS was based on particulars that can no longer happen or are no longer there. |
dancer42 Send message Joined: 2 Jun 02 Posts: 455 Credit: 2,422,890 RAC: 1 |
By changing what that act does, they simply make the SCOTUS decision obsolete.You people are barking up the wrong tree blinded by your agenda. The true evils are the Wal*Marts who supply no health coverage. Would you rather Hobby Lobby not pay for three items or drop all health care? That is what you are demanding whether you know it or not. ====================================================================== First of full time employees are counted (in regards to the ACA)by the total number of hours worked divided by 40 divided by 52 ie 2 20h/w worker = 1 40h/w worker you must have 50 or more full time (40/w workers) to have to have insurance i guarantee that walmart has to provide insurance under the ACA. and while the states can call for a constitutional convention this brings the entire constitution up for review and amendment and no one in thier right mind would trust congress to do that it is never going to happen! |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30593 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
and while the states can call for a constitutional convention this brings the entire constitution up for review and amendment and no one in thier right mind would trust congress to do that it is never going to happen! You are right, no one would trust congress, not even the authors of the constitution. |
Batter Up Send message Joined: 5 May 99 Posts: 1946 Credit: 24,860,347 RAC: 0 |
have read that the owners of hobby lobby start all managerial meetings with a prayer that is not them exercising their right to practice it is a blatant attempt to force their employees to to practice the sameIt is one family praying together, the key to this decision is "a closely held company". This is nothing new really. A landlord can discriminate if her property is small and she lives there. If she doesn't want to have a man living on her property she doesn't have to. and while the states can call for a constitutional convention this brings the entire constitution up for review and amendment and no one in thier right mind would trust congress to do that it is never going to happen!Congress, POTUS and SCOTUS have no say if 34 states call for a constitutional convention. The House and Senate MUST meet with representative of the 50 states and normal rules for changes apply except they all vote then and there. Will that happen probably not but it is the law. Edit: Upon further review we may be closer than we think; the question is can a state rescind its calling for a convention. If not it's time to rent a hall. Accidental history: How Michigan may have triggered convention to amend U.S. Constitution |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30593 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
The House and Senate MUST meet with representative of the 50 states and normal rules for changes apply except they all vote then and there. Better go for an eye exam. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.