Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I tried to call Roberts’ office, to let him know that the people who pay his salary expect him to show some leadership (especially if they want to avoid outside oversight). I got transferred to a recording that says they have no public comment line. Why is that okay? They are public SERVANTS.

Probably because they would get looney tune idiots like the ones protesting illegally in front of the justices' homes to call and leave threats and messages warning them that they have "released the whirlwind and they won't know what will hit them if they follow through on decisions."
Kind of like what Schumer said a couple years ago.

They certainly don't need that.

Anonymous wrote:I tried to call Roberts’ office, to let him know that the people who pay his salary expect him to show some leadership (especially if they want to avoid outside oversight). I got transferred to a recording that says they have no public comment line. Why is that okay? They are public SERVANTS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The modern right wing in the US has re-interpreted the Second Amendment to mean unfettered access to guns, but traditional conservative jurists disagreed with that read and have called out the judicial activism of the last 20 years on this topic that has led the the gun hellscape we are living in now.

Interesting, at the Federal and state level laws placing restrictions on gun ownership and the ability to carry those arms has greatly increased over the past 20 years.

So unless the guns are acting on their own, the reason we are living in a “gun hellscape” would more likely be the lack of appropriate mental health care.

Perhaps focusing on the root cause of the violence, including violence where guns are used, would make society better. Isn’t that your actual goal?

So where are the GOP bills supporting more money for mental health care?
I have seen it from the Dems, but the GOP vote against all the time.

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Anonymous wrote:Don't forget the one-time-only, "this applies to George W. Bush only" Equal Protection decision in Bush v. Gore that stopped the state's votes from being counted as ordered by the Florida Supreme Court which, in turn, led to the installation of Bush as President and put Roberts and Alito on the court.

So, Roberts and Alito are the fruit of that illegitimate decision. Gorsuch was the product of the illegitimate blocking of Obama's appointment. Barrett was jammed through after the people elected Biden. Thomas was legitimately appointed by a popularly elected President, but he is now known to be too corrupt to hold office; not even recusing himself in a case involving his wife's efforts to overthrow the United States government.

If you ignore the fact that most of the country wanted Clinton rather than Trump, Kavanaugh -- even if he is a sexual assaulter just like Trump -- is probably entitled to his seat.

Anonymous wrote:Don't forget the one-time-only, "this applies to George W. Bush only" Equal Protection decision in Bush v. Gore that stopped the state's votes from being counted as ordered by the Florida Supreme Court which, in turn, led to the installation of Bush as President and put Roberts and Alito on the court.

So, Roberts and Alito are the fruit of that illegitimate decision. Gorsuch was the product of the illegitimate blocking of Obama's appointment. Barrett was jammed through after the people elected Biden. Thomas was legitimately appointed by a popularly elected President, but he is now known to be too corrupt to hold office; not even recusing himself in a case involving his wife's efforts to overthrow the United States government.

If you ignore the fact that most of the country wanted Clinton rather than Trump, Kavanaugh -- even if he is a sexual assaulter just like Trump -- is probably entitled to his seat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The modern right wing in the US has re-interpreted the Second Amendment to mean unfettered access to guns, but traditional conservative jurists disagreed with that read and have called out the judicial activism of the last 20 years on this topic that has led the the gun hellscape we are living in now.

Interesting, at the Federal and state level laws placing restrictions on gun ownership and the ability to carry those arms has greatly increased over the past 20 years.

So unless the guns are acting on their own, the reason we are living in a “gun hellscape” would more likely be the lack of appropriate mental health care.

Perhaps focusing on the root cause of the violence, including violence where guns are used, would make society better. Isn’t that your actual goal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The modern right wing in the US has re-interpreted the Second Amendment to mean unfettered access to guns, but traditional conservative jurists disagreed with that read and have called out the judicial activism of the last 20 years on this topic that has led the the gun hellscape we are living in now.

Interesting, at the Federal and state level laws placing restrictions on gun ownership and the ability to carry those arms has greatly increased over the past 20 years.

So unless the guns are acting on their own, the reason we are living in a “gun hellscape” would more likely be the lack of appropriate mental health care.

Perhaps focusing on the root cause of the violence, including violence where guns are used, would make society better. Isn’t that your actual goal?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The modern right wing in the US has re-interpreted the Second Amendment to mean unfettered access to guns, but traditional conservative jurists disagreed with that read and have called out the judicial activism of the last 20 years on this topic that has led the the gun hellscape we are living in now.

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.