|
Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner thinks the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and post-Civil War amendments aren't really worth studying.Judge Richard Posner posted:And on another note about academia and practical law, I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries—well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments). Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21st century. Which means that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post–Civil War amendments (including the 14th), do not speak to today. David Strauss is right: The Supreme Court treats the Constitution like it is authorizing the court to create a common law of constitutional law, based on current concerns, not what those 18th-century guys were worrying about. Posner's Full Op-Ed here. TL;DR (Too Long, Don't Read) the basic laws of America. They were created by old dudes and they don't apply to life now.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:10 |
|
|
# ? Apr 25, 2024 23:25 |
|
posner america's neg rear end
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:11 |
|
so if he's not fine with the Bill of Rights nor post-Civil War amendments, does that mean the 11th and 12th amendments are okay since they're in-between
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:12 |
|
I'm trying to figure out what the 11th Amendment is about (The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State) and the 12th is about how we elect presidents. Maybe Posner doesn't like them either.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:18 |
|
Android Bicyclist posted:Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner thinks the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and post-Civil War amendments aren't really worth studying. TLDR
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:21 |
|
we need some more hip, up to date amendments with hashtags in em
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:22 |
|
Parallax Scroll posted:we need some more hip, up to date amendments with hashtags in em Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of YOLO
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:23 |
|
Amendment 28: You have the inalienable right to suck my big 'ol Donkey dick, fuckman.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:25 |
|
i want your hot sweaty bills all over my rights
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:27 |
|
I've yada yada'd the Constitution
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:29 |
|
Horniest Manticore posted:posner america's neg rear end
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:29 |
|
Android Bicyclist posted:I'm trying to figure out what the 11th Amendment is about (The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State) and the 12th is about how we elect presidents. The 11th Amendment is one of the fun parts of the Constitution that means something much different than what it says. By its text, it prevents residents from one state from suing another state in federal court - preserving state sovereign immunity in one specific context. The Supreme Court has put on its special glasses and determined that the 11th amendment actually stands for a broad principle that stops private citizens from suing states in federal court generally as well as administrative tribunals that look too much like courts. Oh, and the 11th or rather the ~~broad principle of sovereign immunity for which it stands~~ also stops Congress from authorizing private suits against states under most circumstances in federal or state court. Sovereign immunity's a hell of a thing.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:31 |
|
Amendment 69420 Smoke weed get pussy gently caress yeah the forefathers were str8 gangsters
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:33 |
|
rt hon potatoe pc posted:The 11th Amendment is one of the fun parts of the Constitution that means something much different than what it says. By its text, it prevents residents from one state from suing another state in federal court - preserving state sovereign immunity in one specific context. The Supreme Court has put on its special glasses and determined that the 11th amendment actually stands for a broad principle that stops private citizens from suing states in federal court generally as well as administrative tribunals that look too much like courts. Oh, and the 11th or rather the ~~broad principle of sovereign immunity for which it stands~~ also stops Congress from authorizing private suits against states under most circumstances in federal or state court. thats a dumb boring amendment. we'll never get millennials into the constitution with poo poo like that on there
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:34 |
|
the constitution is an outdated 200 year old document, taken as dogma by a group of people who also take a certain outdated 2000 year document as dogma
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:34 |
|
Anderron Shi posted:Amendment 69420 this is more like it
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:35 |
|
Our Founding Fathers didn't predict that we'd have machine guns. Nor did they predict we'd have the internet. Or no more slaves. Or women voting. Our Founding Fathers had lovely crystal balls. How come Nostradamus could predict a ton of poo poo but Ben Franklin couldn't figure out Snapchat?
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:37 |
|
Horniest Manticore posted:Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of YOLO This might be the funniest thing I've ever read. I don't know why. But I am going to plagiarize it so all my friends think I'm cool. YOLO.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:37 |
|
AugmentedVision posted:the constitution is an outdated 200 year old document, taken as dogma by a group of people who also take a certain outdated 2000 year document as dogma "But does your flag have gold fringe?" *Disappears in a puff of smoke*
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:38 |
|
Horniest Manticore posted:Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of YOLO Since the Founding Fathers were all old white dudes, wouldn't they be more "Carpe Diem?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec8FOZvcPVM
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:39 |
|
Well, the liberal piece of poo poo swore an oath to uphold it, and since he's made it public that he fundamentally doesn't believe in it, he can go clear his desk and gently caress off. Impeach this cocksucker.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:40 |
|
Is YOLO still funny or is this another case of GBS double reverse irony?
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:40 |
|
Look guys, I know my job is to read law but gently caress you allright, the constitution? Really? Like what even is it? peep my twitter and facebook to watch me get more and more gradually bored with reading #judgelifeintheinternetpornfactory
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:41 |
|
context, baby, context.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:43 |
|
Typical Pubbie posted:Is YOLO still funny or is this another case of GBS double reverse irony? I think everybody likes that one small unincorporated community in California.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:43 |
|
to be fare a lot of that poo poo was written in a way that is impossible to apply by the letter of the law to modern society and modern technology. it's also really loving open to interpretation which the foundation of your entire system probably shouldn't be let's burn it down, eat the rich, and start over
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:46 |
|
This is like 90% of constitutional law:
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 03:59 |
|
He really shouldn't have phrased it as dumb as he did, but thisAndroid Bicyclist posted:the basic laws of America. They were created by old dudes and they don't apply to life now. is not wrong
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:00 |
|
Referring to Richard Posner like he's just another judge is kind of underselling his accomplishments.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:12 |
|
Horniest Manticore posted:posner america's neg rear end
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:13 |
|
guess he's a thomas jefferson fan
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:17 |
|
I mean, is this really news? Judges all just interpret the constitution however the gently caress they want anyway. If they agree then it's all "oh the constitution is the foundation for law in our great society blah blah blah" and if not then it's "well the Founding FathersTM, great as they were, couldn't have forseen all of the problems of our modern society and so hurr hurr hurr" This dude sounds like he's just stating his personal bias, but it's not like the rest of 'em don't have their own, in one way or another.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:43 |
|
Tectonis posted:Amendment 28: You have the inalienable right to suck my big 'ol Donkey dick, fuckman.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:45 |
|
Tectonis posted:Amendment 28: You have the inalienable right to suck my big 'ol Donkey dick, fuckman. I seem to have missed this before writing my rant, which I'm now retracting. From the text above it is clear that the Constitution is still a living document, and fundamental for the preservation of inalienable rights in our country.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:48 |
|
Android Bicyclist posted:Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner thinks the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and post-Civil War amendments aren't really worth studying. This is the guy who is going to replace Scalia.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:50 |
|
When the OP quote starts with "And" then it's probably out of context.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:54 |
|
op aborted this thread all over the forumsc
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 04:54 |
|
Prorat posted:When the OP quote starts with "And" then it's probably out of context. It's actually more or less in context, in that there's not much context for that quote in the rest of the op-ed. The first bit is him just complaining about law professors and teachers not having any actual practical experience lawing.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 05:29 |
|
Horniest Manticore posted:posner america's neg rear end
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 05:31 |
|
|
# ? Apr 25, 2024 23:25 |
|
Amendment 37: Inasmuch as a thing exists, the right of the citizens to make porn of it shall not be infringed.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2016 05:58 |