General Discussion

Ilikepurple

(835 posts)

27. I'm not sure who you are arguing against in this thread.

Fri Jul 3, 2026, 05:51 PM

Friday

I think Ms.Toad provided a clear and informed explanation of this specific issue, the general problem of interpreting legal language, and the Supreme Court’s ultimate authority on interpreting the Constitution. The Constitution did not explicitly grant this authority, but the Court’s finding it had this authority in 1803 has been been the law of the land since. There have been both legal and academic debates about judicial review.

Your arguments seem to be aimed at what you see as a flawed system, rather than at what I see as a fairly accurate explanation of constitutional jurisprudence. If we are arguing what should be the case rather than what is, this should be explicitly stated because that matter is much more complex.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ohh That's Rich - birthright citizenship 6-3 to 5-4 ruling explained [View all] Figarosmom Wednesday OP

Kavanaugh doesn't understand the constitution DemocracyForever Wednesday #1

Or he was trying to give trump Figarosmom Wednesday #2

Congressional law can never override the constitution DemocracyForever Wednesday #3

They can always pass a law to give the Supreme Court another shot to get it "right". Ilikepurple Wednesday #8

It would need to be a legal move DemocracyForever Thursday #13

I never said reconsider the case. An actual law could be rightly challenged and reach the Supreme Court. Ilikepurple Thursday #14

Again, Congressional law can't override the constitution. DemocracyForever Thursday #17

What would you be saying if the numbers for this case were reversed? Ilikepurple Thursday #20

The 14th amendment is clear DemocracyForever Friday #21

This is still just an opinion and one that doesn't carry the force of law if the Supreme Court decides otherwise. Ilikepurple Friday #25

It's called actual facts DemocracyForever Saturday #31

Congressional laws can never overturn the constitution DemocracyForever Thursday #18

"What's a constitution?" - Brett NameAlreadyTaken Wednesday #4

The U.S. constitution DemocracyForever Wednesday #7

That's not what he is saying. Ms. Toad Thursday #15

It's not accurate DemocracyForever Thursday #16

The constitution is only as clear as those designated to interpret say it is. Ms. Toad Thursday #19

"All persons" is clear DemocracyForever Friday #22

Four of the people who we have charged with deciding what the constitution means disagree with you. Ms. Toad Friday #23

I'm amazed by the tongue twisting DemocracyForever Friday #24

I'm not sure who you are arguing against in this thread. Ilikepurple Friday #27

Are you saying the children of foreign diplomats Ms. Toad Friday #28

So don't believe your eyes? DemocracyForever Saturday #29

I am United States attorney Ms. Toad Saturday #37

NAACP Legal Defense Fund chair disagrees with you DemocracyForever 8 hrs ago #38

Under current law, yes. Ms. Toad 6 hrs ago #39

Congress can pass an amendment to override................... Lovie777 Wednesday #5

Congress can pass a constitutional amendment DemocracyForever Saturday #30

Aren't these meat stuffed robes supposed to be legal geniuses?? NoMoreRepugs Wednesday #6

Onlookers astonished by JD Vance's latest attempt to dunk on Pope Leo: 'Excommunicate him' CNYHarris Wednesday #9

From a quote from an unpublished piece on the internet CNYHarris Wednesday #10

We must protect the native born on planets in the galaxy. CNYHarris Wednesday #11

TLDR Mossfern Friday #26

From AI CNYHarris Saturday #32

What the article does prove CNYHarris Saturday #33

This message was self-deleted by its author CNYHarris Saturday #35

AI final take on the article/work CNYHarris Saturday #36

More the truth is stronger than fiction CNYHarris Saturday #34

vance and crew are not free market capitalists. Figarosmom Wednesday #12