Ontopic NDAA

Josh

Biff Clurton
Oct 9, 2006
7,753
4,054
523
East bumfuck.
Marklar
₥6,700
Judicial system and judges? Bah.. we don't need no stinkin judicial system or judges. Only need the media and the gov't to try, convict, and punish the masses.
 

ZRH

(retired?) Google-F.U.
Mar 5, 2005
24,700
1,604
573
<3
Marklar
₥7,330
Judicial system and judges? Bah.. we don't need no stinkin judicial system or judges. Only need the media and the gov't to try, convict, and punish the masses.
Just going to point out the Judiciary is part of the government...

ya know...

>.>
 

plot

Morning Boehner
Oct 16, 2006
20,031
4,165
573
kansas city
Marklar
₥1,882
Judicial system and judges? Bah.. we don't need no stinkin judicial system or judges. Only need the media and the gov't to try, convict, and punish the masses.

let me explain to you how checks & balances work.

1st citizen gets detained
they take it to trial, goes to supreme court
supreme court rules the whole law unconstitutional it's nullified.
 

ZRH

(retired?) Google-F.U.
Mar 5, 2005
24,700
1,604
573
<3
Marklar
₥7,330
let me explain to you how checks & balances work.

1st citizen gets detained
they take it to trial, goes to supreme court
supreme court rules the whole law unconstitutional it's nullified.
Isnt he Canadian? They don't understand that stuff. :p
 

OzSTEEZ

¡ɟɟo ʞɔnɟ ʇunɔ 'ᴉO
Nov 11, 2008
35,468
9,438
473
41
Oz
Marklar
₥25,442
let me explain to you how checks & balances work.

1st citizen gets detained
they take it to trial, goes to supreme court
supreme court rules the whole law unconstitutional it's nullified.

Doesn't passing laws that are unconstitutional end up wasting money and other resources?
 

my little brony

Keep Being A Little Bitch
Oct 15, 2004
34,953
18,766
823
Marklar
₥21,493
let me explain to you how checks & balances work.

1st citizen gets detained
they take it to trial, goes to supreme court
supreme court rules the whole law unconstitutional it's nullified.

that's assuming that scotus agrees to hear it

or that the circuit court agrees to hear it

or that the district court agrees to hear it

or that any of them, up to and including scotus, actually agrees that it's unconstitutional. I don't have much faith in this court
 

ZRH

(retired?) Google-F.U.
Mar 5, 2005
24,700
1,604
573
<3
Marklar
₥7,330
that's assuming that scotus agrees to hear it

or that the circuit court agrees to hear it

or that the district court agrees to hear it

or that any of them, up to and including scotus, actually agrees that it's unconstitutional. I don't have much faith in this court
Federal District Court would be the court of original jurisdiction, district court judges can involuntary dismiss cases, esp on jurisdiction or "no remedy," but not refuse them. Circuit courts have defined classes of discretionary review and mandatory review. Supreme Court is the only one with unlimited discretion.

Default judgement and involuntary dismissal are entirely different than discretionary review, i.e. you need a final judgement before you can even have a concept of review.
 
Last edited: