maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Wed Dec 19, 2018 10:46 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 6:55 pm 
Offline
Hair in the soap
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:46 am
Posts: 19274
Reputation points: 17927
Not much of a Molyneux fan, but the subject of select judges legislating from the bench is one that needs to be brought up more often.

Increasing amount of appointees, not elected representatives, making laws in our gov't.


_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Wed May 16, 2018 8:37 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 3:06 pm
Posts: 12126
Location: inside your worst nightmare
Reputation points: 16336
If memory serves, Roman Empire had this same problem increasingly as the years drug on.

_________________
Anthro's NSFW Thread


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 7:04 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 11606
Reputation points: 17050
Same everywhere. Technocrats and bureaucrats under every stone.

We are massively overregulated which doesn’t help.

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 9:48 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27941
Reputation points: 20000
Perhaps the best example is DACA....which was an Executive Order announcing a decision to violate his oath of office and NOT FOLLOW EXISTING LAW and sprinkle in a bunch of administrative crap that was never authorized or funded by Congress...then Trump proposes to have the Congress solve the problem, which is the obvious Constitutional course....and a raft of judges appointed for life issue restraining orders ORDERING the Executive Branch (the leader of which is directly elected) to NOT FOLLOW THE WILL OF THE CONGRESS (which is directly elected every 2-6 years).

The intentional pretzel "logic" literally makes your head hurt.

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 9:59 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 11606
Reputation points: 17050
jack t ripper wrote:
Perhaps the best example is DACA....which was an Executive Order announcing a decision to violate his oath of office and NOT FOLLOW EXISTING LAW and sprinkle in a bunch of administrative crap that was never authorized or funded by Congress...then Trump proposes to have the Congress solve the problem, which is the obvious Constitutional course....and a raft of judges appointed for life issue restraining orders ORDERING the Executive Branch (the leader of which is directly elected) to NOT FOLLOW THE WILL OF THE CONGRESS (which is directly elected every 2-6 years).

The intentional pretzel "logic" literally makes your head hurt.


Having spoken to lawyers there's no fucking point, frankly, having a discussion with them about anything substantive, unless you like lots of circular 'letter of the law' word games.

I did ask one in the last spar wtf they thought the end result of this style of getting your own way would be. Because IMHO ultimately all it will achieve is to destroy the faith in the institutions these people draw their power from.

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 11:14 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:19 pm
Posts: 27941
Reputation points: 20000
Over here literally EVERYTHING gets litigated.

The process is LEGISLATE then LITIGATE. The Congress could issue a proclamation that "Dogs are man's best friend" and 5 minutes later the American Feline Association would file a lawsuit.

When you buy a "Save the Whales" bumper sticker the whales never get any of the money...you just hired a lawyer for 22 seconds

_________________
I haven't figured out how to the block thingy works but if anyone alters my posts I will become really, really angry and throw monkey poop out of my cage.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 11:17 am 
Offline
His Most Gracious Majesty, Commie of the Year
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 12:44 pm
Posts: 7880
Reputation points: 17300
EUBanana wrote:
jack t ripper wrote:
Perhaps the best example is DACA....which was an Executive Order announcing a decision to violate his oath of office and NOT FOLLOW EXISTING LAW and sprinkle in a bunch of administrative crap that was never authorized or funded by Congress...then Trump proposes to have the Congress solve the problem, which is the obvious Constitutional course....and a raft of judges appointed for life issue restraining orders ORDERING the Executive Branch (the leader of which is directly elected) to NOT FOLLOW THE WILL OF THE CONGRESS (which is directly elected every 2-6 years).

The intentional pretzel "logic" literally makes your head hurt.


Having spoken to lawyers there's no fucking point, frankly, having a discussion with them about anything substantive, unless you like lots of circular 'letter of the law' word games.

I did ask one in the last spar wtf they thought the end result of this style of getting your own way would be. Because IMHO ultimately all it will achieve is to destroy the faith in the institutions these people draw their power from.


The whole notion of "legality principle" is moot.

In law there are only stances that people adopt.
"So, it is your stance that the accused stabbed you"
-"it's on the fucking video!"
"well, that's your stance. We assert that you did it to yourself and fabricated the video and that if it indeed was a stabbing then it was of the special kind that must be pardoned"

Even stuff involving interpreting constitution etc. is subjective to policy and the agenda of the committee doing the legal work.

Simply, there's a law that says "don't piss on the street" and the lawyers can either go by that or they can dance around semantics and suddenly "don't piss on the street" means that you can piss on the street in some cases, the street in question isn't a street or peeing is an archaic term and actually means specific kind of.. bla bla.

_________________
Screw you nero


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 2:10 pm 
Offline
Hair in the soap
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:46 am
Posts: 19274
Reputation points: 17927
EUBanana wrote:

Having spoken to lawyers there's no fucking point, frankly, having a discussion with them about anything substantive, unless you like lots of circular 'letter of the law' word games.

I did ask one in the last spar wtf they thought the end result of this style of getting your own way would be. Because IMHO ultimately all it will achieve is to destroy the faith in the institutions these people draw their power from.


Bringing it upon themselves then.. :P

Image

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Legislating From The Bench
PostPosted: Thu May 17, 2018 6:45 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:44 am
Posts: 11606
Reputation points: 17050
Kameolontti wrote:
Simply, there's a law that says "don't piss on the street" and the lawyers can either go by that or they can dance around semantics and suddenly "don't piss on the street" means that you can piss on the street in some cases, the street in question isn't a street or peeing is an archaic term and actually means specific kind of.. bla bla.


Yup, exactly that.

No wonder juries piss these people off. A jury, I would hope, wouldn't put up with that sort of bull shit.

_________________
“The gap in EU finances arising from the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and from the financing needs of new priorities need to be clearly acknowledged.” - Mario Monti


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group