Hucakbee says we should just ignore the United States Supreme Court

You mean like now with the sitting president ignoring the rule of law?

The man isn't saying the rule of law should be ignored. Why does the guy actually doing it get a pass while you focus on someone who has about a 5% chance of winning the presidency in two years.

Here' what Huckabee actually said, not what the headline said:

"If the courts make a decision, I hear governors and even some aspirants to the presidency say well, that's settled, and it’s the law of the land," he said. "No, it isn't the law of the land. Constitutionally, the courts cannot make a law. They can interpret one. And then the legislature has to create enabling legislation, and the executive has to sign it, and has to enforce it."

If the courts interpret that there is no provision in the Constitution to allow gay marriage, will you be just as upset with a Democrat hopeful suggesting it's time we propose an amendment? Originally Posted by boardman

Sorry, but neither you or Huckabee get it. If the SCOTUS says it is the law of the land, it is the law of the land......think Roe v. Wade. Could there be a constitutional amendment? Of course. But, until there is....or until Roe v. Wade is overturned....that supreme court decision is....the Law of the Land. Based, of course, on constitutional interpretation.

Sorry, but neither you or Huckabee get it. If the SCOTUS says it is the law of the land, it is the law of the land......think Roe v. Wade. Could there be a constitutional amendment? Of course. But, until there is....or until Roe v. Wade is overturned....that supreme court decision is....the Law of the Land. Based, of course, on constitutional interpretation. Originally Posted by timpage

How many times has this Supreme Court struck down an Obama decision.....isn't it about 19 times? Not one single victory to hang his hat on and 19 losses. Seems like Obama is ignoring the SCOTUS unless he is chastising them at a SOTU.

Sorry, but neither you or Huckabee get it. If the SCOTUS says it is the law of the land, it is the law of the land......think Roe v. Wade. Could there be a constitutional amendment? Of course. But, until there is....or until Roe v. Wade is overturned....that supreme court decision is....the Law of the Land. Based, of course, on constitutional interpretation. Originally Posted by timpage

Now you're making my point for me.

Bibles, constitutions and courts oh my! You guys realize that this argument iOS a silly waste of time until you can agree on this:

WHO IS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY?

If you can't agree on that you'll argue forever because it's all relative to your perspective.

"John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" President Andrew Jackson.

During the Civil War a sitting U.S. Congressman, a Democrat, as well the mayor, police chief, the entire Board of Police, and the city council of Baltimore were arrested without charge and imprisoned indefinitely without trial.

President Lincoln's action was quickly challenged in court and overturned by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Maryland (led by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Roger B. Taney) in Ex Parte Merryman. Chief Justice Taney ruled the suspension unconstitutional, stating that only Congress could suspend habeas corpus. Lincoln and his Attorney General Edward Bates not only ignored the Chief Justice's order, but when Lincoln's dismissal of the ruling was criticized in an editorial by Francis Scott Key's grandson, prominent Baltimore newspaper editor Frank Key Howard, he was himself arrested by federal troops without charge or trial. Ironically, federal troops imprisoned the editor in Fort McHenry, which, as he noted, was the same fort where the Star Spangled Banner had been waving "o'er the land of the free" in his grandfather's song. (wiki)

.

Judicial review was used as an effort for Justice Marshall to cover up his own screw up. It's not in the Constitution. That being said, Huckabee is still an idiot.

Judicial review was used as an effort for Justice Marshall to cover up his own screw up. It's not in the Constitution. That being said, Huckabee is still an idiot. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

My first blush is always to disagree with you on the grounds that you are too...but in this case I tend to think that while maybe Huckabee isn't an idiot, he does need to be looking elsewhere for work. Politics just isn't his thing. And I do agree with the comment on judicial review.

My first blush is always to disagree with you on the grounds that you are too...but in this case I tend to think that while maybe Huckabee isn't an idiot, he does need to be looking elsewhere for work. Politics just isn't his thing. And I do agree with the comment on judicial review. Originally Posted by JustCause

I'm not disagreeing with you at all but this is an example of the question I bring up all the time.

Do we want people who maybe aren't the best politicians but are great leaders in office or do we want to continue to elect the people who are best at blowing smoke up our ass?

We want someone who isn't a DC insider but then when they come along we trash them for not knowing the inner workings and political gotcha games of DC.

Joe Walsh for President!!!!!

...

Joe Walsh for President!!!!! Originally Posted by boardman

You talking Mr. Rocky Mountain Way or the Illinois congressman? Either way, I'm good!