|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Are We Now Electing Supreme Court Justices?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Within our current framework, the Judicial Crisis Network’s ads strike me as slick but entirely conventional in their blandness. But assuming that there’s still a line somewhere, I believe the National Rifle Association has crossed it with a commercial declaring that “President Trump chose Brett Kavanaugh to break the tie” between the “liberal justices” who “oppose your right to self-defense” and the “four justices” (who are seemingly without left-to-right ideology) who “support your right to self-defense.” The ad concludes: “Your right to self-defense depends on this vote. Tell your senator to defend our right to self-defense. Confirm Judge Kavanaugh.” |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/16/2018)
|
A complete mis-characterization.
Political "left" and "right" is a smoke screen when considering SCOTUS nominees. The issue is the nominee's fealty to the Constitution, as it was written and intended to mean.
The vetting must be geared toward embracing originalism and rejecting consequentialism.
As a general rule, that means rejecting Democrat nominees and confirming Republican ones.
There will always be exceptions but they will be far and few between, and exceptions don't make the rule.
|
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
