|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
riderinthestorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 11:40 AM Original message |
How do we know SCOTUS will uphold the 9th Circuits ruling on DADT? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ozymanithrax (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 11:45 AM Response to Original message |
1. We don't, We simply must wait and see. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
riderinthestorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 11:56 AM Response to Reply #1 |
3. If SCOTUS determines DADT is constitutional I fear we will lose this window for another |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ozymanithrax (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:20 PM Response to Reply #3 |
7. Decades, no. This issue isn't going away. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zipplewrath (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 11:49 AM Response to Original message |
2. A very strange place indeed |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sabrina 1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:06 PM Response to Reply #2 |
6. Very well said. And none of the excuses they have given |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zipplewrath (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:46 PM Response to Reply #6 |
11. They are following history, not leading it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ineeda (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 11:59 AM Response to Original message |
4. I believe it's a two-pronged attack against DADT -- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
riderinthestorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:02 PM Response to Reply #4 |
5. What signs point you in the direction that Congress will repeal this law? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ineeda (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:46 PM Response to Reply #5 |
10. Two words |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ozymanithrax (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:25 PM Response to Reply #4 |
8. If the Roberts Court should declare it unsonstitutional... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 01:19 PM Response to Reply #8 |
15. and if the Roberts court (no friend to progressive causes) finds it Constitutionally? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ieoeja (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 01:31 PM Response to Reply #15 |
16. Then the lame duck Senate stops filibustering the repeal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ozymanithrax (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 03:06 PM Response to Reply #15 |
30. Then it must be revoked by act of Congress. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
librechik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:34 PM Response to Original message |
9. SCOTUS works hard to protect the conservative agenda |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:37 PM Response to Reply #9 |
23. Not true. They do have to follow the law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 03:07 PM Response to Reply #23 |
31. They interpret the Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
librechik (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 03:25 PM Response to Reply #23 |
33. I didn't realize detainee cases made it to SCOTUS |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud Liberal Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 12:49 PM Response to Original message |
12. DADT won't be enshrined forever |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 01:18 PM Response to Reply #12 |
14. OF course it wouldn't however if SCOTUS finds it Constitutional... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud Liberal Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 01:44 PM Response to Reply #14 |
17. Theoretically yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
riderinthestorm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 01:57 PM Response to Reply #17 |
18. I just find the assumptions here at DU that Congress WILL appeal DADT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud Liberal Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:10 PM Response to Reply #18 |
19. Nothing is certain of course |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:31 PM Response to Reply #19 |
21. I agree it is only a matter of time. Public opinion has shifted. We are seeing history. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Proud Liberal Dem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:45 PM Response to Reply #21 |
27. What lack of leadership are you referring to? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 01:17 PM Response to Original message |
13. What happens if the Supremes overturn that ruling? DADT is enshrined... forever? YES. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lyric (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:39 PM Response to Reply #13 |
24. I don't think you quite understand how judicial review works. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 03:00 PM Response to Reply #24 |
28. maybe you should reread what I wrote. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lyric (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 03:25 PM Response to Reply #28 |
32. Okay. I agree that such a ruling against DADT would be a miscarriage of justice. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 03:35 PM Response to Reply #32 |
34. I am not giving up just suggesting that Obama appeal is needlessly reckless. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:39 PM Response to Reply #13 |
25. So, as far as I can tell, Obama is taking the riskiest way forward possible. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Statistical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 03:04 PM Response to Reply #25 |
29. I agree. It is very dangerous especially w/ current court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lyric (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:16 PM Response to Original message |
20. Nothing? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:34 PM Response to Original message |
22. No it's not untouchable |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleobulus (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Oct-20-10 02:44 PM Response to Reply #22 |
26. The only way Congress can get around a Supreme Court ruling is if the... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu May 02nd 2024, 11:45 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC