3 ms·
Fighting unconstitutional laws in the phony secret "court" set up by the same laws is not really fighting, is it? It's sort of accepting the terms. Take the ba
by flexie 13y ago
Fighting unconstitutional laws in the phony secret "court" set up by the same laws is not really fighting, is it? It's sort of accepting the terms.
Take the battle to the real courts and ask them to decide on the matter.
- sageikosa 13y agoUnfortunately, those are real courts, their functions and jurisdictions have been established by the Congress.
- flexie 13y agoIf congress can redefine courts into what is basically an administrative panel, then the entire separation of powers can be short-circuited. It's not a court just because congress says so.
- gwright 13y ago> The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. Congress certainly does have the 'say so' -- at least with 'inferior Courts'. That still leaves the Supreme Court though as final arbiter.
- genwin 13y agoThat's the crux of the matter. The root cause is that half of Americans are okay with such courts.
- sageikosa 13y agoI'd like to agree with you. I believe there is a category of societal actions that constitutes a court of justice within the framework of a civil society; secrecy doesn't fall into that category.
- talmand 13y agoExactly how do you get standing to sue the government for something they are not doing with something that does not exist?