Should have 9-0

[farmstud60]

The student loan forgiveness ruling should have been 9-0 if all the Supreme Court Justices followed the United States Constitution. The Executive in office should not have the power for this type of action, it should only be allowed if passed by the legislative branch which is Congress.



The policy can be debated, but the ruling was not about policy but separation of power the Constitution set up between the 3 branches of government.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by farmstud60

...The policy can be debated, but the ruling was not about policy but separation of power the Constitution set up between the 3 branches of government.

Of course the Demonicrats see it as a corrupted third branch, i.e. Judiciary, as being the problem and the only practical solution is to dilute that branch and pack it with diversity hires of their choosing, to keep it sufficiently subservient to their will.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

So when Trump diverted billions of dollars from projects approved by Congress to the DOD for the military to fund building of his wall, was that also a violation of "separation of power the Constitution set up between the 3 branches of government."

Trump Administration Diverts $3.8 Billion In Pentagon Funding To Border Wall

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/13/80579...to-border-wall

[farmstud60]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

So when Trump diverted billions of dollars from projects approved by Congress to the DOD for the military to fund building of his wall, was that also a violation of "separation of power the Constitution set up between the 3 branches of government."

Trump Administration Diverts $3.8 Billion In Pentagon Funding To Border Wall

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/13/80579...to-border-wall

More complicated as the wall is part of national defense.

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Of course the Demonicrats see it as a corrupted third branch, i.e. Judiciary, as being the problem and the only practical solution is to dilute that branch and pack it with diversity hires of their choosing, to keep it sufficiently subservient to their will.

AOC is demanding that Justices be brought before Congress and be made to “testify” about the things she doesn’t like.

News flash for Ms Bartender. They Justices are a separate an equal Branch of Government. Congress, or the President, can’t question them about anything unless they first impeached by the House and tried and convicted in the Senate.

I think that was covered in Freshman Civics class in High School. She was probably busy giving buck toothed blowjobs in the boys bath room instead of being in class.

[nevergaveitathought]

There should never be “progressives” on the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the last civil line in defense and protection of the constitution

To have “progressives” on the court like we do is opposed to the purpose of the Supreme Court

A “balanced” court is a defeated and flawed court as to constitutional law and therefore the courts purpose

[NiceGuy53]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

So when Trump diverted billions of dollars from projects approved by Congress to the DOD for the military to fund building of his wall, was that also a violation of "separation of power the Constitution set up between the 3 branches of government."

Trump Administration Diverts $3.8 Billion In Pentagon Funding To Border Wall

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/13/80579...to-border-wall

No. Not according to the Supreme Court who upheld the Trump administration's actions.

[Salty Again]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

AOC is demanding that Justices be brought before Congress and be made to “testify” about the things she doesn’t like.

News flash for Ms Bartender.

I think that was covered in Freshman Civics class in High School. She was probably busy giving buck toothed blowjobs in the boys bath room instead of being in class.

... Hmmmmm... ... If so - i'm surely willing
to give he a pass on that...

... She just one more "progressive liberal" who has
NO understanding of the rules of law.

She was chosen for congress 'cause of her pretty eyes
and nice arse... And congress will be as far as her
political career goes.

... The Supreme Court is going to rule however they wish.
The GREAT thing is there are some Conservatives on it...

#### Salty

[Precious_b]

Yeah, the goober in chief more than likely (before ruling) overstepped. I really didn't care if they pay or not (being one who foolishly paid off his student loan first before higher interest loans I had.)

Former potus surely as guilty as pointed out above. Especially with his buddy mitch stacking the court and helping with the judges too. Funny how da righties are saying all those judges are libby.

[ICU 812]

My perception is that the progressive left views the SCOTUS as their special magic box. Put something you don't like in and get something else you do like out of it. . .. regardless of statute or Constitutional law.

Things have not always gone their way (Bush V. Gore) but ever since the Warren court of the 1960s, the liberal court's decisions have moved American society far to the left of where it ewas just after WW-II.

Now, the Nation has justices on the high bench that know the law and can read the Constitution. Many recent decisions can be overturned by congress passing or amending statutes to further the liberal agenda. But they ar accustomed to just getting their way in court. The change is uncomfortable for them..

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by NiceGuy53

No. Not according to the Supreme Court who upheld the Trump administration's actions.

Not totally correct from the information I can find. It is true that in July 2020 SCOTUS sided with Trump on building the border wall with diverted military funds.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/sto...l-construction

But on October 10, 2020 the following ruling was made:

"A federal appeals court ruled late Friday that President Donald Trump’s use of his emergency powers to build his long-promised border wall with military funds is illegal, striking a blow to one of his signature campaign promises just weeks before the November election.

The 2-1 decision from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals comes as $3.6 billion was slated for construction of about a dozen projects, including two projects in the Laredo and El Paso areas. The money was diverted from funds dedicated for military construction after the president declared a national emergency in February 2019 to tap the funds. The projects in Texas would have covered more than 60 miles, according to the American Civil Liberties Union."

https://www.texastribune.org/2020/10...-wall-lawsuit/

Then in October 2020 "The Supreme Court said Monday that it will hear a challenge to the Trump administration's use of Pentagon money to build the southern border wall and also its appeal of a ruling that blocked a policy sending asylum applicants to Mexico while they wait for their appeals to be heard."

So I don't know why SCOTUS was looking into the spending again after it ruled in July. BUt then they decided it was all moot since Biden took office and cancelled the spending.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by farmstud60

More complicated as the wall is part of national defense.

It might be "more complicated" but ignoring the Constitution and circumventing Congress is wrong under any circumstances.

[Jackie S]

The Supreme Court has the final say on the Constitutionality of any law or order.

The Congress’s solution to this is through the Amendment process. If and Amendment passes, then it becomes part of the Constitution, which of course the SCOTUS must adhere too.