|
|
scream-of-consciousness; "If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
|
|
"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. " |
This will be the comment box |
Speaking of bandaids, Excedrin PM's by the bed, at least.
mary
::
Mary, you may try what I do to get relief from the daily horror that the news cycle has become.
Chug red whiskey from the bottle until you start puking. When done properly, you'll have the dry heaves which can result in several hours of peace.
::
Been working in the ER for the last 15 years. The Houston story doesn't surprise me at all.
And there's not a damn thing you can do about it.
And the 'U' shaped toilet seat will not interupt that peace Rodger.
Tim
Rodger, I would have expected the Real King of France to know that all US law, every scrap of it, is based on foreign law. Most is based on English common law and Louisiana's is based on the French Napoleonic code.
I read the article and all the skinny ugly judge said was that she would consider good arguments even if they came from foreign courts, but would not be bound by them.
I take it your position is you would ignore good arguments from foreign courts. And here I thought one of America's great strengths was its willingness to take the best of the best, no matter where it came from, but I like your idea better. Buy American!! Even if it's a stupid argument.
Fredzy, you ignorant slut. A judge's job is to interpret US law as it applies to individual cases. US law is indeed based on foreign law but it is US law. A judge's decisions must be based in US law. A foreign case may well be a fine example of justice and can point the way for creating new US law, but it has no place in the judgments of a US court. Creating new US law is the job of the legislatures, not the courts. Are we to convict our own citizens for breaking foreign laws in our own country? Ridiculous, and so is this old biddy.
"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - G.K. Chesterton That applies to judges, too.
GrinfilledCelt
It might help if more people understood the difference between binding authority and persuasive authority.
Judges must follow binding authority. It includes the Constitution and decisions by higher courts within the same legal system. Persuasive authority is merely a suggestion. It can include all sorts of things: legal review articles, obiter dicta, and decisions of foreign courts.
Persuasive authority has always included the decisions of foreign courts. There is nothing new about what Ginsburg has said. There is only a difference of opinion about how much weight one should give to various types of persuasive authority. As the article points out, some judges choose to give foreign courts no weight at all.
(I had to repost this to fix an error)
Picture Caption: "D'jever notice that soul food sticks to your ribs way better than say Chinese or Caucasion food?..Know what I mean?
It would be nice to know if FredZ was at all persuaded by these entirely correct rebuttals. I'm wondering if it's possible to teach anyone with set ideas anymore.
Such is the life-cycle of trolls everywhere.
GrinfilledCelt