Federal Judge, an appointee, makes a ruling against a law set in place by democratically elected government. In the past, (DADT, Prop. 8 ) this has ALWAYS earned the Judge your ire, supposedly not concerning what they were ruling, but because of what they were doing. Being an "Activist Judge," I think is the popular right-wing term.
So you're gonna go ahead and say that Judges DO have the right to make rulings like this, so long as you agree with the ruling?
So you're gonna go ahead and say that Judges DO have the right to make rulings like this, so long as you agree with the ruling?
Eschew Verbosity
This message last edited by Dannymac on 13/12/2010 at 09:12:05 PM
Federal judge in Va. strikes down health care law -
13/12/2010 05:21:37 PM
- 1055 Views

*yawn*
13/12/2010 05:46:58 PM
- 722 Views
Another step closer to SCOTUS.....and that will be 5-4 decision in favor of repeal!
*NM*
13/12/2010 05:55:54 PM
- 279 Views

So riddle me this...
13/12/2010 07:23:14 PM
- 708 Views
He's not "making his own law", just denying the government the ability to.....
13/12/2010 08:06:48 PM
- 678 Views
That wasn't my question.
13/12/2010 09:10:39 PM
- 778 Views
I get what you're saying...
13/12/2010 11:30:13 PM
- 774 Views
Agreed; when do I get a refund for my share of the B2 bomber?
14/12/2010 04:40:25 AM
- 706 Views
But see...you are using the B2 bomber.
14/12/2010 03:59:27 PM
- 638 Views
Much as you are using the healthcare system.
14/12/2010 05:55:40 PM
- 757 Views
*nods*
14/12/2010 06:09:42 PM
- 733 Views
Again we're back to whether individuals deign to tolerate majority rule.
14/12/2010 07:27:22 PM
- 847 Views
It's judicial review
14/12/2010 02:47:43 PM
- 728 Views
I really don't understand why people defend the forced purchase aspect
13/12/2010 08:22:03 PM
- 749 Views
This analogy no doubt has its flaws too, but I was just reminded of it...
13/12/2010 08:52:31 PM
- 760 Views
Forced insurance purchase would indeed be terribly unconstitutional.
14/12/2010 04:26:27 AM
- 674 Views
there is a major problem with this..
14/12/2010 01:29:41 AM
- 718 Views
Bad analogy.....
14/12/2010 02:57:28 AM
- 674 Views
Re: Bad analogy.....
14/12/2010 03:23:31 AM
- 687 Views
Not everyone uses the HC system and many can pay for it without insurance.....
14/12/2010 03:42:26 AM
- 674 Views
Re: Not everyone uses the HC system and many can pay for it without insurance.....
14/12/2010 04:53:39 AM
- 688 Views
Just to note....
14/12/2010 06:11:57 PM
- 681 Views
yeah, but the courts exist to strike down dumb legislation, which is what this ruling does
14/12/2010 03:17:04 AM
- 636 Views
No, the courts exist to interpret legislation, and the SCOTUS to strike down illegal legislation.
14/12/2010 04:36:59 AM
- 655 Views
I'll excerpt some relevant passages, but the full article is in the link.
14/12/2010 02:10:48 PM
- 829 Views
He partially owns the lobby aiming to make it unconstitutional, which the plaintiff was a client of *NM*
14/12/2010 05:35:21 PM
- 346 Views