Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[penguinofhonor]

I think my grandma just tried to set me up with some chick she met at a workshop thing.

[Steelmagic]

My grandmother doesn't try to set me up with women. I think I'm ok with that actually.

[Tellemurius]

I think my grandma just tried to set me up with some chick she met at a workshop thing.

was she hot?

[Devling]

I think my grandma just tried to set me up with some chick she met at a workshop thing.

was she hot?

Tellemurius: Most Refined Bay Watcher

[Descan]

Is your grandma hot?

[penguinofhonor]

Is your grandma hot?

why would you say this

[Descan]

:3c

[Graknorke]

I think my grandma just tried to set me up with some chick she met at a workshop thing.

was she hot?

Seconded. If your grandma has good taste in women then that's pretty cool.

[Aklyon]

Is your grandma hot?

why would you say this

Descan.

[Gamerlord]

Is your grandma hot?

why would you say this

Descan.

Descan go sit in the corner.

[Descan]

:c

[Akura]

http://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-decided-silence-used-against-161934950.html

Why don't they just get it over with and decide that whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing isn't something they believe in anymore?

So, what is it now? Anything you do or don't say can and will be used against you? Seriously, the conservative element in this country is basically out of control at this point. How are these braindeads thinking, "Your Honor, we have incriminating evidence against the defendant. He said nothing when he was arrested?"

All he did was not answer a question....

The hell? I'm pretty sure the Constitution applies even if you don't remind the legal system that it applies. That fact that you have to remind the legal system that the Constitution that serves as the very basis of said legal system even exists is, quite frankly, disturbing.

Is there any way to appeal this?

[Greiger]

The constitution is somewhat open to interpretation, and unless I'm wrong the Supreme Court is the highest power that decides how it's interpreted. 

There's that whole checks and balances thing, so I think the congress senate and president could potentially do something to stop it, but I never learned what exactly the other branches can do to stop supreme court decisions.  As far as I'm aware the only option is for the president to pardon everyone snared by it.

[RedWarrior0]

Or to amend the Constitution.

[Lord Shonus]

Not exactly. Technically, a lower court can simply decide the opposite on a later case, but such a decision is highly likely to be overturned due to the Supreme Court precedent, and it's highly unlikely that the Court would agree to hear a case so similar to one that the current justices had already decided on. Further, the Court also tends not to hear cases that bear similarity to one the immediately previous court had decided, as this has a strong feel of partisan politics, which the Court is supposed to be above.

This is both good and bad. Good decisions tend to be allowed to stand long enough to prove their wisdom and outlast the political shitstorms that they were in response to or caused. Brown v Board Of Education is probably the best example of this. However, questionable decisions have a good chance of standing long enough that they become firmly entrenched in precedent and are difficult to remove. Dred Scott v. Sandford was eliminated only by the abolition of slavery after the American Civil War, while Plessy v. Ferguson stood for nearly 60 years.