Trump and stare decisis

by Original Quill Thu Oct 11, 2018 11:41 pm

Trump has created precedent all over the place. One thing about America politics, if it has happened once, it will happen again.

What will we see again when the Democrats are again in power?

by Lurker Fri Oct 12, 2018 12:19 am

I hope we see sanity restored. There is no sanity in the Trump White House.

by Original Quill Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:10 am

Lurker wrote:I hope we see sanity restored. There is no sanity in the Trump White House.

Unfortunately Lurker, once a tactic is out the bag, it's common practice for the other side to use it. I mean, who's so stupid to give it up?

by Lurker Fri Oct 12, 2018 3:43 pm

You may be right. The office of the Presidency has been stained forever.

by Original Quill Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:58 pm

Not only that, but Mitch McConnell has taught us the Senate may not approve appointments, if made by a president of the opposite party. Remember, he held up the vote on Merritt Garland to the Supreme Court until a new, more friendly president came on? What if a Senate, manned by the opposite party, refused to seat a president's entire cabinet?

This is how tactics become regular, accepted procedure. As for Trump, he has opened the door to ignoring Congress (remember: withholding congressional sanctions on Russia) and what else? Applying the pocket veto (sticking it in the pocket and forgetting it) to many actions, gives the president the authority to completely ignore Congress, and ultimately democracy. Same with signing statements...a contrivance going back to GWB.

by Lurker Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:37 pm

IMO, the Republicans in Washington are traitors and should be executed as such. They are destroying democracy any way they can.

by Original Quill Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:23 pm

Lurker wrote:IMO, the Republicans in Washington are traitors and should be executed as such. They are destroying democracy any way they can.

I have a sneaking hunch, way in the back of my mind somewhere, that the Russian mafia compromised much more than the Trump family. Republicans in Congress, both the House and Senate, are acting too squirrelly, in lock-step with Trump, to be performing just by chance. And it's much more than just party cohesion. Take Devin Nunes, and his midnight run to the White House with top secret materials, for example. That didn't come out of nowhere. Too aberrant and focused for chance.

And there's too much Republican law breaking. Hell, the Republicans were once candy-strippers. Now they are now anti-FBI, anti-law-and-order, anti-Justice Department, willing to overthrow all of what they believed in ten years ago. And it was too much, too soon. That wasn't happening incrementally. That wasn't evolution; that was revolution. Begs the question, what caused it?

Ask yourself, if Russia can tilt the Trump family so easily, wouldn't they have been trying the same thing with half of the 100-senators, and 435-congressmen? Hardly a big task with the help of the Internet.

The Republicans would have been perfect candidates, with their devotion to money and their ethos of selfishness. So much easier to corrupt a greedy person than a temperate and meticulous person.

I think the deeper we dig into this Russia thing, the more we are going to find the Republicans are owned by the Russians.

by JulesV Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:Trump has created precedent all over the place. One thing about America politics, if it has happened once, it will happen again.

What will we see again when the Democrats are again in power?

You mean in future millions will once more be without adequate medical insurance ….. while the taxpayer forks out £250,000 extra per day for security because the FLOTUS was too sentimentally attached to her previous home?

by JulesV Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:38 pm

What does the title mean, luv? Trump and stare decisis 265384880

by Original Quill Sun Oct 14, 2018 4:32 pm

Jules wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Trump has created precedent all over the place. One thing about America politics, if it has happened once, it will happen again.

What will we see again when the Democrats are again in power?

You mean in future millions will once more be without adequate medical insurance ….. while the taxpayer forks out £250,000 extra per day for security because the FLOTUS was too sentimentally attached to her previous home?

More in the nature of tactics, than policy issues such as healthcare. For example, delaying consent hearings in the Senate for any appointments, especially judicial nominations, can work both ways on party, but procedurally it's now approved.

by Original Quill Sun Oct 14, 2018 5:02 pm

Jules wrote:What does the title mean, luv?

Stare Decisis is the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent. Most of the time lawyers just use the term 'precedent', but it's the same principle as applied to law: a doctrine or policy of following rules or principles laid down in previous judicial decisions unless they contravene the ordinary principles of justice. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stare%20decisis

Since the US Constitution determines procedural precedent, or how things are properly done, the point is that there is a huge widening of constitutional procedure. Some of it is in tiny details--eg, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa created the precedent of shutting off the microphone of his counterpart when it came his turn to speak, http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/issa-shuts-down-his-own-irs-hearing--but when it comes to important questions, the precedent of detail looms much larger.

What we have in Trump, often through ignorance, but many times intentionally, is a person who is willing to completely ignore precedent. He is not a lawyer, but he is a spoiled rich kid, and he is intolerant of and impatient with following the rules. As a consequence, in general, he is creating a massive restructuring of procedure at all levels of government.

by JulesV Sun Oct 14, 2018 9:52 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Jules wrote:What does the title mean, luv?

Stare Decisis is the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent. Most of the time lawyers just use the term 'precedent', but it's the same principle as applied to law: a doctrine or policy of following rules or principles laid down in previous judicial decisions unless they contravene the ordinary principles of justice. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stare%20decisis

Since the US Constitution determines procedural precedent, or how things are properly done, the point is that there is a huge widening of constitutional procedure. Some of it is in tiny details--eg, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa created the precedent of shutting off the microphone of his counterpart when it came his turn to speak, http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/issa-shuts-down-his-own-irs-hearing--but when it comes to important questions, the precedent of detail looms much larger.

What we have in Trump, often through ignorance, but many times intentionally, is a person who is willing to completely ignore precedent. He is not a lawyer, but he is a spoiled rich kid, and he is intolerant of and impatient with following the rules. As a consequence, in general, he is creating a massive restructuring of procedure at all levels of government.

Blimey, I'm sorry I asked. Suspect

by JulesV Sun Oct 14, 2018 9:56 pm

Hahaha jesting! lol!

Thanks for explaining it, Quill. x

Latin phrases are usually very easy to translate but I just couldn't get a handle on that one.

by Original Quill Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:14 pm

Jules wrote:Hahaha jesting!

Thanks for explaining it, Quill. x

Latin phrases are usually very easy to translate but I just couldn't get a handle on that one.

My answer did include two examples...so it was a bit extended. I was combining my points: 1) to answer your question; and 2) to add two more examples.

by Original Quill Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:00 am

Has Trump created precedent for ignoring federal court rulings?

WASHINGTON POST wrote:Trump administration to circumvent court limits on detention of child migrants

PUBLISHED: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2018

WASHINGTON - The Trump administration took the first official step Thursday toward withdrawing from a court agreement that limits the government’s ability to hold minors in immigration jails, a move advocates say could lead to a rapid expansion of detention facilities and more time in custody for children.

The changes proposed by the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Health and Human Services would terminate the Flores Settlement Agreement, the federal consent decree that has shaped detention standards for underage migrants since 1997.

If the administration may unilaterally contravene a Federal Court order, even if by Consent Decree, might not the government ignore a Court order any time, any place? What about corporations? What about wealthy people?

This might be the answer to the conservative Supreme Court's adverse rulings when Democrats are back in power. Give 'em a pat on the back and say 'nice try, but no thanks'.

It's a new world. Wink

by Sponsored content

Trump and stare decisis

Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis

Re: Trump and stare decisis