Lead

Jul 22 14 3:33 PM

Tags : :

well looks like logic was sent sailing lmao and now the court will find itself embroyaled in all kindsa law suits that ould have never been had they not ruled that hobby lobby was a person and therefore had the right to determine its employees access to birth control .....  what a bunch of fucking idjets


never in the history of this country has the supream court ever 1. looked so stupid and 2. over stepped its own bounds ...... 

well stupid is as stupid does and there ain't no cure for stupid cept maybe a bullet between the eyes but thats just a personal oppinion lmao lets just hope that they are done breeding ....

ok so here's my bitch like you didn't know this one was comming right????  :)
never in the 200 years plus history of this country has the court so boldly over reached it legal authority and actually tried to write law instead of ruling on it but hey leave it to this court to try and pull this shit and they did and so far they've actually seemingly gotten away with it the thing is that once this "ruling" is challenged and it will be all over the fucking place they are going to look like the Azz clowns they are .....

You see even though a "corporation" has been ajudicated a person for far longer than I am old it was always done so with the strictest interpratation (veiw that as narrow)What is CORPORATION?Read in: SpanishAn artificial person or legal entity created by or under the authority of the laws of a state or nation, composed, in some rare instances, of a single person and his successors, being the incumbents of a particular oltice, but ordinarily consisting of an association of numerous individuals, who subsist as a body politic under a special denomination, which is regarded In law as having a personality and existence distinct from that of its several members, and which is, by the same authority, vested with the capacity of continuous succession, irrespective of changes in its membership, either in perpetuity or for a limited term of years, and of acting as a unit or single individual in matters relating to the common purpose of the association, within the scope of the powers and authorities conferred upon such bodies by law. See Case of Sutton’s Hospital, 10 Coke. 32; Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. 518, 636, 657. 4 L. Ed. 629; U. S. v. Trinidad Coal Co., 137 U. S. 160, 11 Sup. Ct. 57. 34 L. Ed. 640; Andrews Bros. Co. v. Youngstown Coke Co., 86 Fed. 585, 30 C. C. A. 293; Porter v. Railroad Co., 76 111. 573; State v. Payne, 129 Mo. 468, 31 S. W. 797. 33 L. R. A. 576; Farmers’ L. & T. Co. v. New York, 7 Hill (N. Y.) 2S3; State BL.LAW DICT.(2D ED.)

Law Dictionary: What is CORPORATION? definition of CORPORATION (Black's Law Dictionary)


none of the cases sited have confered actual personhood on the corp just that it is veiwed as a person ....... big difference huge as a matter of fact under the law but thats my opinnion lmao shakes head and wonders if it was this body of justices plan to do away with the court if they actually wanted to create caselaw which would allow the dismemberment of the supream court by placing it in contention with the law because they have over-reached and created law rather than following the law ?????//  its an odd thought but hey maybe surely they knew when overreaching that this ruling would be challenged on the basis that it has no basis lol well fuck me and god dam I haven't laughed like this in years you'll have to excuse me while I gather my wool / thoughts on the matter .....

so there you have it a court that's only job is to interpart the law blowing it by creating law a no no and this is where we start to trip the light fantastic at a rather rapid pasce and rush blindly into the void "gods' bless em for this one I seriously haven't been this amused since they were debating on throwing out the UCC lol but there ya have it they've gone off the deep end and thrown out 200 + years of law based on precidence and poof all gone up in smoke .....

and the question is now what????  do we start over????/  do we go forth in this brave new world with nothing to rely on ????  does / do all cases now get decided by jury irregaurdless of precidence now that the Supream Court has ruled it obsolete and useless???  this opens all laws to debate and question and that my freinds is one hell of a slippery slope to be on...... 

If we no longer base the law of the land on precidence then what will it be based on the attorney's ability to argue the case ???  showmanship ????  certainly not the law because the Supream Court through out the law and precidence and the narrow construe when they expanded and then created a new law with this case .....  now mind you I'm not an expert in the law nor do I claime to be but as a par legal I was trained to research the law based on prescidence and now the court in all it's wisdom has done away with prescidence and just made up its own shit ?????/  color me confused the next decade or two will surely see some odd dam battels over everything this will of course be a feild day for attorney's .....  big two thumbs up on that one cause everything from legal diffinitions to standard clauses are now open to challenge with out precidence nothing and I do mean nothing holds true everything under the sun as far as the law goes is up for challenge contracts are pretty much not worht the papper they are written on simply because there is no way to enforce any of it or them without legal precidence and the court RULED that obsolete ......

I see a brae new frounteer opening before us all a world without law and that should be interesting ........  wath the fall out cause everything under the sun is now fair game now that there is no requirement to follow established form everythings a go.....

I heard that prisoners are all set to use hobbylobb's ruling to challenge their convictions amung other obscerd law suits to many to name its gonna be a bumpy road and I can hardly wait for the chips to fall where they may ......  who knew that they had 5 anarchist sitting on the court I sure as hell wouldn't have guessed it but there ya have it and thats what they are 'gods' bless em I can live with it shit I love anarchy no more answering to anyone all established laws are now bullshit and what's up is now down thanks you guys are doing a great job and I can hardly wait to see what all will bounce ..............From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Not to be confused with precedence.
 In common law legal systems, a precedent or authority is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. The general principle in common law legal systems is that similar cases should be decided so as to give similar and predictable outcomes, and the principle of precedent is the mechanism by which that goal is attained. Black's Law Dictionary defines "precedent" as a "rule of law established for the first time by a court for a particular type of case and thereafter referred to in deciding similar cases."[1] Common law precedent is a third kind of law, on equal footing with statutory law (statutes and codes enacted by legislative bodies), and regulatory law (regulations promulgated by executive branch agencies).Stare decisis (Anglo-Latin pronunciation: /ˈstɛər dɨˈssɨs/) is a legal principle by which judges are obliged to respect the precedent established by prior decisions. The words originate from the phrasing of the principle in the Latin maxim Stare decisis et non quieta movere: "to stand by decisions and not disturb the undisturbed."[2] In a legal context, this is understood to mean that courts should generally abide by precedent and not disturb settled matters.[2]Case law is the set of decisions of adjudicatory tribunals that can be cited as precedent. In most countries, including most European countries, the term is applied to any set of rulings on law which is guided by previous rulings, for example, previous decisions of a government agency - that is, precedential case law can arise from either a judicial ruling or a ruling of an adjudication within an executive branch agency. Trials and hearings that do not result in written decisions of a court of record do not create precedent for future court decisions.[3]

wikipedia.org


snort lmao so you see when they expaned the scope of the law they through out the baby with the bathwater and by god I'm still amazed that they did it the conservatives turn out to be the radicals and the radicals in this case turned out to be the consevatives  like I said a world turned upside down black is white blue is brown and the merry-go-round goes round and round  blinky blink kinda make me wonder cause you know I never thought I'd live to see the day ......

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12a644_k53l.pdf

now I bet your asking yourself but Raven how does this decision affect all other laws of the land well because like I said the laws of this land are based on prescidence and aren't just popped into existence by the whims of people they follow a set course and the court is also supposed to follow a set course but thoses little buggers are a wild an frisky bunch and well instead of following the narrow constrainsts of the law they through causion to the wind and said ta hell with following anything lets just make it up as we go ......  mind you this is an under taking that has never been done in he 200+ years of the court so there went precidence poof up in smoke and all the laws that were based on it along with it gooooooooooooooooooooooooone just like that .....

see the normal job of the supream court (prior to this bunch of banana's) was to rule on points of law to interprate how the law did or did not apply and to see if it in anyway had any merit or basis on or opposed to the constitution of the land .........  by narrow confines


they did not willy nilly come hither and thither slap things together and come up with any new meaings or definitions they didn't over reach ......  but they did with hobby lobby and in doing so basically in one fell swoop anilhilated prescidence boom gone for ever more .... wow and to think I lived to see it seriously


lets go back and take a close look at what it says a corporation is its a person it has the ability to conduct business as such but by expanding on that this court allowed  the hobby lobby corporation to have feelings and oppinions just like a regular 'living' person now no where in the history of corporations does it say that they have feelings and oppinions but by this court over reaching its authority and confuring feelings and oppinions upon 'family held' corps they  wrote law rather than ruled upon it .......  thats the first time hey've done that in all of the courts history before everything like I said was based on prescidence but this, this changed everything ......

and like I said thye threw out the rule of precidence and moved on to chaosis jumped with both feet into the abysis and well the consquences like I said of throwing away the rule of prescidence will be far sweeping to say the least every law of the land based on it is now up for review and fight .....  every power confered by state county and public service can now be questioned and brought to suit like I said a feild day and absolute feild day for attorney's cause now everything from a simple traffic ticket to a life sentence can be challenged its a simple matter of do they have authority well what gives them authority ect.....  nothing is as it seems without prescidence nothing is to be taken as an absolute because everything must be established all over again .... bizzare but true kinda makes me wish I'da gone to law school cause attorneys are gonna get rich off this shit
 

Last Edited By: ravenwynter1 Jul 22 14 4:47 PM. Edited 4 times