• Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      You say that like you genuinely believe the law matters, consider reexamining that assumption

      • thedruid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        The mistake your making is looking at the subject. The courts won’t do something unconstitutional. TRUMP will

        So until the courts play the game of “no law” they HAVE to do that.

        WE don’t.

        • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          If they have a choice at all then no they do not have to, they are choosing to, that’s just what the words mean

          • thedruid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            17 days ago

            No. See the courts don’t make law. They interpret it. But they can’t ignore the constitution or they wouldn’t be courts.

                  • thedruid@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    15 days ago

                    No, child, you are being petulant and spoiled. You want more treason and chaos because you are upset at the president. And you not only have every right, I am as well

                    But the answer isn’t to destroy our government even more

                    It’s to remove the administration before they do more damage. A private army run by people who can make any law without answering to civilian?

                    You are giving the government what they want. Mire thugs, less accountability, and more cash.

                    It’s a foolish, poorly thought out proposal that creates vastly more problems

                    Now I am through being reasonable Bout this subject. If you do not know how the government works and why we as citizens need to stand and fight instead of the courts, then you are one of the issues.

                    I truly do wish you the best. I will not waste more time on this.

      • thedruid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 days ago

        I understand and support your irritation and disgust at this administration

        But this is not how the court works. They could , hire some contractors I guess, but they cannot unilateraly create a security service

        • wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          The Supreme court manifested the entire concept of jurisprudence. I think they could do the same for a system of officers of the court.

          • thedruid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 days ago

            Umm. I think you have your facts mistaken or are speaking of something other than jurisprudence.

            • wetbeardhairs@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              15 days ago

              Marshall laid out his arguments for judicial review in Marbury v Madison. At the time it was supported by Hamilton and others too. But it’s not explicitly stated in the constitution. Jurisprudence is entirely an unconstitutional (though consistent with other sections of the constitution) power that the courts granted themselves. It’s been a long time since my last us history class though.