Professors urge Biden to defy rulings by Supreme Court justices

No surprise here. Biden should have been crucified when he pushed the take the Covid shot or lose your job. Supreme Court and the constitution are only important when it helps them.

a reply to: DBCowboy

What is there to chime in about?

Its two people whom none of heard of before this FOX NEWS article gave them the spotlight, NOT THE BIDEN ADMIN DOING THIS.

Anyways
Andrew Jackson and FDR both clashed with the supreme court as president in different ways, though I would not say it was a good thing that they did.

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: DBCowboy

What is there to chime in about?

Its two people whom none of heard of before this FOX NEWS article gave them the spotlight, NOT THE BIDEN ADMIN DOING THIS.

Anyways
Andrew Jackson and FDR both clashed with the supreme court as president in different ways, though I would not say it was a good thing that they did.

Like I stated, CRT "just started in the classroom" like it's no big deal, right?

Now see where we are.

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: DBCowboy
What is there to chime in about?

Its two people whom none of heard of before this FOX NEWS article gave them the spotlight, NOT THE BIDEN ADMIN DOING THIS.

Anyways
Andrew Jackson and FDR both clashed with the supreme court as president in different ways, though I would not say it was a good thing that they did.

Agreed; the people who are lobbying for this approach are not a part of Biden administration. They are just Liberal Technocrats. The Biden administration has not made any moves that would suggest they would follow this advice from their progressive base. People should not pin this thought process on Joe Biden.



Given the last part of your post; what is your opinion on the position the Liberal Technocrats are taking? They call it "popular constitutionalism". They believe that because the court has no enforcement capabilities the court only exists at the acceptance of others ... and because of that Joe Biden (or any present I guess) has the power to simply ignore the Supreme Court and make his own interpretations of the constitution.

I wonder if they would agree that the next conservative president should follow the same "popular constitutionalism" and make their own interpretations of the Constitution.

Its all part of some plan to turn the country into a totalitarian state. Its probably going to work too since they breed new socialist Democrats by the second in those universities.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Correct, the College level law course for how laws can be biased either by they way they were purposefully made or a side effect of there passing, is not a problematic thing.

The CRT you are afraid of is a made up thing, by conservative Christopher F. Rufo to start another right-wing identity politics outrage story. Notice how CRT is almost completely gone from the right-wing narrative and has switched to groomers?

a reply to: dandandat2

Every president has their own interpretations of the constitution, same with every supreme court judge, which is why we have 9 instead of 1.

Technically he could ignore the court ruling and it would be up to congress to punish him, that is the enforcement mechanism that is part of the constitution: Impeachment.

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: DBCowboy

Correct, the College level law course for how laws can be biased either by they way they were purposefully made or a side effect of there passing, is not a problematic thing.

The CRT you are afraid of is a made up thing, by conservative Christopher F. Rufo to start another right-wing identity politics outrage story. Notice how CRT is almost completely gone from the right-wing narrative and has switched to groomers?

What logic is this? So because its not in the news 24-7 it doesnt exist? Do you want me to send you some links or will you do your own research?

I wonder if there is contempt of Supreme Court? Maybe if they gave Joe 90 days in the local jail if he would listen to them?

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: dandandat2

Every president has their own interpretations of the constitution, same with every supreme court judge, which is why we have 9 instead of 1.

Technically he could ignore the court ruling and it would be up to congress to punish him, that is the enforcement mechanism that is part of the constitution: Impeachment.

We are not talking about personal opinions here; as you point out everyone has them. What these Liberal Technocrats are suggesting is an Executive Branch action plan; to defy the court and usurper it's constitution power for its own. Changing the 9 scholarly voices into one political voice.

But I do agree that our constitution allows for both the Executive and Legislature to defy court rulings; it's one of the checks and balances written into the constitution. How ever when it happens it amounts to a "constitution crisis" (for lack of a better phrase); which is why it has occurred very sparingly in the countries history.

It sounds to me like the Liberal Technocrats want to make it a process used much more frequently. Would that be a problem?

originally posted by: ElitePlebeian

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: DBCowboy

Correct, the College level law course for how laws can be biased either by they way they were purposefully made or a side effect of there passing, is not a problematic thing.

The CRT you are afraid of is a made up thing, by conservative Christopher F. Rufo to start another right-wing identity politics outrage story. Notice how CRT is almost completely gone from the right-wing narrative and has switched to groomers?

What logic is this? So because its not in the news 24-7 it doesnt exist? Do you want me to send you some links or will you do your own research?

You misunderstand me, CRT was never a problem but to the Right-wing outrage machine but it has since moved on to other topics to like "grooming" and trans people exist and thats icky/scary/a threat to the western world some how.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: ElitePlebeian

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: DBCowboy

Correct, the College level law course for how laws can be biased either by they way they were purposefully made or a side effect of there passing, is not a problematic thing.

The CRT you are afraid of is a made up thing, by conservative Christopher F. Rufo to start another right-wing identity politics outrage story. Notice how CRT is almost completely gone from the right-wing narrative and has switched to groomers?

What logic is this? So because its not in the news 24-7 it doesnt exist? Do you want me to send you some links or will you do your own research?

You misunderstand me, CRT was never a problem but to the Right-wing outrage machine but it has since moved on to other topics to like "grooming" and trans people exist and thats icky/scary/a threat to the western world some how.

If that were true then why do the Republicans have hearings about CRT in the military and schools at this very moment..? youtu.be...

a reply to: ElitePlebeian

Air Force Academy is for training and schooling officer candidates (college). I have no problem with it being taught there.
Officers understanding different life paths and socioeconomic pasts of soldiers they will end up in command of is very important. This may come as a surprise to you and others, officers sometimes council their troops and just dont bark orders from on high.

So I am not sure I understand this "Congressman/Commissioned Officer" (how the hell does that work? as far as I knew you had to resign your commission to serve in congress) Waltz's problem is. Maybe this guy as knowledgeable as the person whose JOB it is to teach Officer Cadets?

The only reason they'd do this is if they had control of the executive branch indefinitely, because otherwise it would be extremely short lived. This would be like the Empire dissolving the senate and instituting a tyrannical dictatorship.

a reply to: Pyle

Well its irrelevant what you think of CRT, but you said the outrage has moved on while it clearly isnt.

Next.

a reply to: dandandat2

Deemphamsizing the supreme court totally worked for Israel!

Let us rejoice.

a reply to: ElitePlebeian



The fact that a couple of congress members try to keep the outrage going by lying to members of the military, does not mean the broader public is talking about CRT anymore. Committee meetings are scheduled way in advance they could not have known at the time it was goin to be dead by then. FOX NEWS has had like 4 articles this week on CRT where they had more then that about Hunter Biden in a on a couple different days the same week. Its a dead topic currently. It could come back if for some reason the GOP decides its "racist again to talk about our racist past as a country so lets shift blame to CRT" time again.

originally posted by: Pyle
a reply to: DBCowboy

Correct, the College level law course for how laws can be biased either by they way they were purposefully made or a side effect of there passing, is not a problematic thing.

The CRT you are afraid of is a made up thing, by conservative Christopher F. Rufo to start another right-wing identity politics outrage story. Notice how CRT is almost completely gone from the right-wing narrative and has switched to groomers?

Nothing has switched.

The left is having a field day with open borders, CRT, grooming children, they are attacking the very foundation of our country with these insane attacks on the Constitution and rule of law. Just look at the leftist DA's and how they are not punishing criminals any longer.

So when a few college professors chime in with this stupidity, we're going to (once again) point out the anti-American sentiment of the left.

I'm urging the judicial branch to start writing laws and striking down old ones we don't like. Let's have the military run our courts and Congress can be put on public works projects. Ready? Set? Go!

a reply to: dandandat2

They sound like Domestic Enemies.

Any one who is in violation of Constitutional Rights, is illegitimate. Any law repugnant to the Constitution is null and void.