No, it means they don't care about it...they just care about their political agenda.
-
-
-
Then they should be removed from the bench
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
It means they are political hacks who have no business serving on the bench.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
No. They understand it; they just ignore it to suit their will.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
We need to get rid of those judges who are making unconstitutional rulings, this is a direct threat to our great USA!
@realDonaldTrump@POTUS@FLOTUS. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
They don't care what the constitution says. They only want to work against POTUS. They probably don't want them in here either. Matter of obstruction
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Or they're democrats and just want to go against our President no matter what.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I believe it means the lower courts fully understand the constitution but have no respect for the constitution
-
A better question is are those judges guilty of malfeasance and as such subject to impeachment and removal..
-
That is the question that should be asked. You are correct 100%. Are the Ninth Circuit judges guilty of wrongdoing as public figures?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Implement a Three Strikes Rule: ANY lower judge/court that has such actions overturned by
@SCotUS three times is removed from service If all three such overturnings are *SEQUENTIAL*, all such judges are immediately disbarred *AND* charged with Constitutional Contempt!Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Can't we make them pass a test to keep their jobs?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The lower courts are filled with humans who, through their own life experiences & educations, have come to understand the Constitution in a different manner. Lower court opinions have been dismissed before by SCOTUS in cases that themselves were later overturned by SCOTUS itself
-
An example of this is Minersville School District v Gobitis, where lower courts ruled it unconstitutional to force students to salute the flag but SCOTUS stated that such enforcement was constitutional, being overturned by WV State BoE v Barnette where SCOTUS ended up...
-
...agreeing with the lower courts of the former case. Lower courts may have a different understanding of the Constitution than SCOTUS, but it's ignorant of you to say they "don't really understand the Constitution at all." Btw if your curious, SCOTUS ruled in Minersville 8-1
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
They understand they just don’t believe in it do not care
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
No, means they don’t care about the@law iit was always a stall tactic interference if you will
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.