Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2020 10:59:32 GMT -5
Waiting should not be mistaken for lack of concern? As Gorsuch himself stated: "...the law before us carries the possibility of criminal sanctions." And "... And these days it sometimes seems agencies change their statutory interpretations almost as often as elections change administrations. How, in all this, can ordinary citizens be expected to keep up—required not only to conform their conduct to the fairest reading of the law they might expect from a neutral judge, but forced to guess whether the statute will be declared ambiguous; to guess again whether the agency’s initial interpretation of the law will be declared “reasonable”; and to guess again whether a later and opposing agency interpretation will also be held “reasonable”? And why should courts, charged with the independent and neutral interpretation of the laws Congress has enacted, defer to such bureaucratic pirouetting?" As referenced in his statement, liberty is at stake, and why the high court would not hear this is beyond troubling, it is disrespectful to We the People. Period. jpfo.org/articles-2020/gorsuch-on-bump-stock-ban.htm?awt_a=A4_P&awt_l=71Xaw&awt_m=K5fAvO1OPlZn_P |
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Mar 7, 2020 13:13:53 GMT -5
The last paragraph of his statement to me is very telling as it reads...
It seems to me that the court is waiting until the other cases are heard before deciding to weigh in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2020 17:14:29 GMT -5
The last paragraph of his statement to me is very telling as it reads... It seems to me that the court is waiting until the other cases are heard before deciding to weigh in. But why? Our rights are not negotiable, and they ought to be defended with a ferociousness that is unrivaled. |
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Mar 7, 2020 18:09:25 GMT -5
The last paragraph of his statement to me is very telling as it reads... It seems to me that the court is waiting until the other cases are heard before deciding to weigh in. But why? Our rights are not negotiable, and they ought to be defended with a ferociousness that is unrivaled. The why was explained. Perhaps not to your satisfaction, but be thankful the court is as conservative as it is, otherwise you might really be unhappy... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2020 18:34:19 GMT -5
But why? Our rights are not negotiable, and they ought to be defended with a ferociousness that is unrivaled. The why was explained. Perhaps not to your satisfaction, but be thankful the court is as conservative as it is, otherwise you might really be unhappy... I reject that explanation. It`s entirely unacceptable. |
|
|
|
Post by jjas on Mar 7, 2020 18:36:39 GMT -5
The why was explained. Perhaps not to your satisfaction, but be thankful the court is as conservative as it is, otherwise you might really be unhappy... I reject that explanation. It`s entirely unacceptable. Be that as it may, I don't really see that you have much of an alternative... |
|
