XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.usa, alt.politics.usa.constitution
XPost: alt.tv.oreilly-factor, rec.arts.tv.news.oreilly-factor
From: none@none.com

On 7/1/2015 8:58 AM, Snout@smack.com wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jul 2015 06:20:59 -0700, Peter Franks 
> wrote:
>
>> On 7/1/2015 2:00 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
>
>>> Generally speaking, we have an activist court, not judges who are able
>>> to put ideology aside.
>>
>> The supreme Court has empowered itself through usurpation and privilege
>> to be the supreme legislative body of the land, and there isn't check
>> and balance against that.
>
> Sure there is.  The rulings ON those cases are there Because the
> plaintiff BROUGHT them ---to-the-court.  Second, the LEGISLATURE can
> write law that conforms with accepted "principles"----which means they
> can't (and won't) in trying to refuse EQUALITY in law.

The supreme Court will then rewrite that law according to its whim and
self aggrandizement.

BTW: Time for you to take your meds.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
 * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)