Thanks: 
Likes: Originally Posted by copier addict
Only in liberal la-la land could a person admit on a public forum (for the world to read) that he'd have oral/anal sex with a tranny and accuse the other person of being a homo. LOL
Dislikes: 0
Only in liberal la-la land could a person admit on a public forum (for the world to read) that he'd have oral/anal sex with a tranny and accuse the other person of being a homo. LOL
Growth is found only in adversity.
It is the first time in decades that they haven't held the majority and they just do not know how to react. As a result they are destroying the US.
Wow!! It's remarkable how obsessed you are. I've already told you I can't help you with your Bi-Curiousity. You really need to talk to someone more qualified. Please reach out before your obsession becomes dangerous
This is rich. We've already shown were "settled precedent" has been overturned before by the court.
bsm2 is a low information voter that is susceptible to fake news and he bought this hook, line, and sinker.
For those who want to know the truth, here it is.....
The Supreme Court has overturned precedent dozens of times in the past 60 years, including when it struck down legal segregation
It is a central principle of law: Courts are supposed to follow earlier decisions – precedent – to resolve current disputes. But it’s inevitable that sometimes, the precedent has to go, and a court has to overrule another court, or even its own decision from an earlier case.
In its upcoming term, the U.S. Supreme Court faces the question of whether to overrule itself on abortion rights. Recent laws in Texas and Mississippi restrict the right of women to terminate pregnancies in ways that appear to challenge the long-standing precedent of the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which allowed women to have abortions in most circumstances.
Over the centuries, courts have stated many reasons they should adhere to precedent. First is the idea of equity or justice, under which “like cases should be decided alike,” as one senior federal judge put it. If a court in the past reviewed a particular set of facts and decided a case in a specific way, fairness dictates it should decide another similar case the same way. Precedent promotes uniformity and consistency in the law.
In addition, precedent promotes judicial efficiency: Courts do not have to decide from scratch every time. Finally, following precedent promotes predictability in the law and protects people who have come to rely on past decisions as a guide for their behavior.
Growth is found only in adversity.
Thanks for making my point Great POST
Please Notice the large bold letters for the smart guy
The Supreme Court has overturned precedent dozens of times in the past 60 years, including when it struck down legal segregation
It is a central principle of law: Courts are supposed to follow earlier decisions – precedent – to resolve current disputes. But it’s inevitable that sometimes, the precedent has to go, and a court has to overrule another court, or even its own decision from an earlier case.
In its upcoming term, the U.S. Supreme Court faces the question of whether to overrule itself on abortion rights. Recent laws in Texas and Mississippi restrict the right of women to terminate pregnancies in ways that appear to challenge the long-standing precedent of the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which allowed women to have abortions in most circumstances.
Over the centuries, courts have stated many reasons they should adhere to precedent. First is the idea of equity or justice, under which “like cases should be decided alike,” as one senior federal judge put it. If a court in the past reviewed a particular set of facts and decided a case in a specific way, fairness dictates it should decide another similar case the same way. Precedent promotes uniformity and consistency in the law.
In addition, precedent promotes judicial efficiency: Courts do not have to decide from scratch every time. Finally, following precedent promotes predictability in the law and protects people who have come to rely on past decisions as a guide for their behavior.
Last edited by bsm2; 12-02-2021 at 10:47 AM.
Thanks for making my point Great POST
Please Notice the large bold letters for the smart guy
The Supreme Court has overturned precedent dozens of times in the past 60 years, including when it struck down legal segregation
It is a central principle of law: Courts are supposed to follow earlier decisions – precedent – to resolve current disputes. But it’s inevitable that sometimes, the precedent has to go, and a court has to overrule another court, or even its own decision from an earlier case.
In its upcoming term, the U.S. Supreme Court faces the question of whether to overrule itself on abortion rights. Recent laws in Texas and Mississippi restrict the right of women to terminate pregnancies in ways that appear to challenge the long-standing precedent of the Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, which allowed women to have abortions in most circumstances.
Over the centuries, courts have stated many reasons they should adhere to precedent. First is the idea of equity or justice, under which “like cases should be decided alike,” as one senior federal judge put it. If a court in the past reviewed a particular set of facts and decided a case in a specific way, fairness dictates it should decide another similar case the same way. Precedent promotes uniformity and consistency in the law.
In addition, precedent promotes judicial efficiency: Courts do not have to decide from scratch every time. Finally, following precedent promotes predictability in the law and protects people who have come to rely on past decisions as a guide for their behavior.
At one time racial segregation was established precedent.
Basically what you're saying is that the SCOTUS should have let segregation stand as the law of the land.
Even you aren't that ignorant, I hope.
Growth is found only in adversity.
Congratulations on confirmation by the above post your stupid
Here is a catchy tune with a great video."Joe" by Five Times August (2021) - YouTube
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks