Hey...activist judges really ARE a threat

[Mr. Harley]

Taney was off the court in 1866 I believe - Google pause. No, he was not off the court, he was dead in 1864. I also subscribe to the opinion that Taney was one of the worst Chief Justices if not the worst in US history. I especially include the case where free Blacks, who had never been slaves, were denied due process and essentially could be seized under the Fugitive Slave Act. That makes Dred Scott look like GOOD!

[DinoDoc]

What does that have to do with his arguements against Lincoln's rampant misuse of his powers?

[Mr. Harley]

Ah - but that is the danger of using one-liners. People can read them any which way but the one you intended, and Taney's legacy is so complex....

However, using the man who would deny US citizens, born free, due process, without any excuse of war, rebellion, etc. as an authority is suspect, to say the least. There are numerous other individuals who did the same thing whose record is not quite so tarnished, and hypocritical. Note that his arguments may be sound - but to cite the man without the argument leaves you open to a challenge concerning the man himself, which I dutifully carried out.

[Ted Striker]

Dinodoc using loaded, open-ended ambiguous one-liners, which could be interpreted with a very wide scope, while he retains one very narrowly focused idea, which he will reveal later?

Get out!!!!

[DinoDoc]

Well it was quite obvious what I was refering to or at least should have been to anyone who brought up ex Parte Milligan as if it were a defense of Lincoln's abuse of the Constitution.

[Ted Striker]

President Bush

[Mr. Harley]

I thought you were referencing activist judges, as per the thread title. Oh, and my reference on Taney and due process, which - funny thing, matches the topic.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
President Bush

Well the arguements both used in the pursuit of power are remarkably similar though Lincoln did go a bit further in his limiting the rights held by the people at least in the free speech arena.

thought you were referencing activist judges, as per the thread title.

I have the 9th Circuit as my playground if that was my intent.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Well the arguements both used in the pursuit of power are remarkably similar though Lincoln did go a bit further in his limiting the rights held by the people at least in the free speech arena.

ZOMG I was referring to his old dog Spot wasn't it obvious!!!!

[Berzerker]

SCOTUS will over rule this decision.

Since the article doesn't offer an explanation as to why the President has this power under the Constitution, I'll quote the defense:

“It's a matter of how paranoid you are,” Andrew Patel said. “What it could mean is that the president conceivably could sign a piece of paper when he has hearsay information that somebody has done something he doesn't like and send them to jail — without a hearing (or) a trial.”

yup One person can imprison another and not have to justify it to a 3rd and neutral party.... kinda like slavery.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
Umm, Ogie those Civil War precedents actually turned out to overrule the President's capability to lock US Citizens without Habeas Corpus. Outside the direct area of conflict even Lincoln's new Surpreme Court (he got to appoint several new judges) overruled him, but not before the Copperhead Clement L. Vallandigham was tried in Ohio and banished by Lincoln to the South (find me banishment in the Constitution).

Umm where did I say word one about any civil war precedent. And by the way aren't I already supposed to be on your ignore list?

[Mr. Harley]

I was going to get around to it - but as I said, I've never tried to do it before. And looking at the thread, it was Lefty who mentioned the Civil War. So I (must unfreeze fingers, must unfreeze fingers) apologize. BTW, your posts here have been up to your better standards, as opposed to you just being obnoxious and stirring the pot.