Yeah, I think he’s signaling. I’m sure he is aware of a case somewhere that is teed up for them to consider. His comments are completely unethical. Judges are not supposed to comment on how they might rule on a case that could come before them. By saying they should reconsider these issues, he’s basically saying he thinks they’ve been decided wrongly and should be overturned. JMO
Original intent: SCOTUS was never the arbiter of constitutionality. Its role was to setting disputes between the states and between the fed gov and foreign nations.
Too much of what our government does is well beyond their constitutional mandate.
Pleased. R vs W was entirely unconstitutional and out of the jurisdiction of the fedgov. We don't all think the same, then this best way to approach this is locally. If abortion has to be it should be at at state level or perhaps a city level where it can be malleable to the local communities and footing the cost should be on the individuals, not the community and certainly not with other peoples money.
Nether of these are Supreme court issues because no one has brought a law suite up in a lower court first. The Supreme court doesn’t make law and can take no action on their own, both of these guys know this, I don’t know why they would say this now? Is it to inflame? The Supreme court doesn’t have standing.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 4.
Too much of what our government does is well beyond their constitutional mandate.
Clarence Thomas – reconsider contraception and gay marriage ~ https://www.foxnews.com/politics/clar...
Nether of these are Supreme court issues because no one has brought a law suite up in a lower court first. The Supreme court doesn’t make law and can take no action on their own, both of these guys know this, I don’t know why they would say this now? Is it to inflame? The Supreme court doesn’t have standing.