They've created a legal system entirely revolving the "letter of the law" and completely forgotten about "the intent of the law".
In fact, distorting the laws to achieve a desired result, no matter how unethical, seems to be an end unto itself and an achievement to brag about at cocktail parties.
Fantastic point! - Cocktail party invites are the "muh pension" excuse of the want to be elite.
I've always shook my head in amazement that these insecure people are so star stuck by those they wish to emulate. We witnessed it with Fox News over the years, until it reached a point where anyone from Fox were persona non grata. I guess all the cucking was for nothing.
It's basically Junior High social pressure on steroids, with a huge dollop of money involved. Where what others think about you is more important than any principles one might have.
And of course Fox News was always going to always because they live in the Beltway, where your trophy wife is telling you to "try to get along" so you can still get invited to the right Christmas parties.
Originalists or textualists like Scalia and Thomas interpret the law as the founders wrote it.
The left interprets the law how they believe it should be intended in modern times or as you put it, "the intent of the law".
We want the law to be interpreted as written. For example 2A, "shall not be infringed". Instead we have commies trying to interpret the "spirit of the law" which results in them stepping all over our rights.
The Left Justices arrives at a pre-determined judgement (pro-choice) and searches for parts of the law that justifies their decision. They don't care about the "intent of the law" in these type of political cases. Their reasoning is from from the bottom up, not top down.
You're correct about everything except for me having it backwards.
The Constitution's intent was made plain by the wording. There is no ambiguity.
The laws that have been created since, billions of pages of them, were written deliberately to be ambiguous so that the intent is hidden, and the crafty little wordsmiths can twist its meaning.
We are discussing two different things, and that's one of the legal slight of hands they pull to keep us divided.
As a former practicing attorney... the entire system is run by self-serving kleptocrats and communists who only care about building their own fiefdoms. The state bar associations that state governments have ceded oversight of the profession to are all run by far left lunatics. There are stories out of my state alone that will make your blood boil. Corrupt government officials and big firm lawyers are protected while they go after independent lawyers and small firms for ANYTHING some trash Karen complains about through an online form they can submit 24/7. Then they publish all the “action” they have annually to show how they are protecting the public... except their job is supposed to be to protect the profession AND the public and they do absolutely zilch to support attorneys who pay $700+ per year for membership that is mandatory.
Why not just say Lawyers? It says it all in just one word.
Lawfare sucks.
They've created a legal system entirely revolving the "letter of the law" and completely forgotten about "the intent of the law".
In fact, distorting the laws to achieve a desired result, no matter how unethical, seems to be an end unto itself and an achievement to brag about at cocktail parties.
Lawfare indeed.
Fantastic point! - Cocktail party invites are the "muh pension" excuse of the want to be elite.
I've always shook my head in amazement that these insecure people are so star stuck by those they wish to emulate. We witnessed it with Fox News over the years, until it reached a point where anyone from Fox were persona non grata. I guess all the cucking was for nothing.
It's basically Junior High social pressure on steroids, with a huge dollop of money involved. Where what others think about you is more important than any principles one might have.
And of course Fox News was always going to always because they live in the Beltway, where your trophy wife is telling you to "try to get along" so you can still get invited to the right Christmas parties.
Last decent Fox person is Bongino. I think. I haven't watched Fox in years.
You have it backwards.
Originalists or textualists like Scalia and Thomas interpret the law as the founders wrote it.
The left interprets the law how they believe it should be intended in modern times or as you put it, "the intent of the law".
We want the law to be interpreted as written. For example 2A, "shall not be infringed". Instead we have commies trying to interpret the "spirit of the law" which results in them stepping all over our rights.
The Left Justices arrives at a pre-determined judgement (pro-choice) and searches for parts of the law that justifies their decision. They don't care about the "intent of the law" in these type of political cases. Their reasoning is from from the bottom up, not top down.
You're correct about everything except for me having it backwards.
The Constitution's intent was made plain by the wording. There is no ambiguity.
The laws that have been created since, billions of pages of them, were written deliberately to be ambiguous so that the intent is hidden, and the crafty little wordsmiths can twist its meaning.
We are discussing two different things, and that's one of the legal slight of hands they pull to keep us divided.
I suggest this was intentional.
Now do the 2nd amd.
Let's see....thats the one that says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED (except.....)".
Right?
I didn't downvote you someone took it serious , guess he didn't read last sentence and saw your handshake.
Wrong. The 'intent of the law' is what the Commies have been using; not the 'letter of the law'.
They just make up the intent that suits them best.
As a former practicing attorney... the entire system is run by self-serving kleptocrats and communists who only care about building their own fiefdoms. The state bar associations that state governments have ceded oversight of the profession to are all run by far left lunatics. There are stories out of my state alone that will make your blood boil. Corrupt government officials and big firm lawyers are protected while they go after independent lawyers and small firms for ANYTHING some trash Karen complains about through an online form they can submit 24/7. Then they publish all the “action” they have annually to show how they are protecting the public... except their job is supposed to be to protect the profession AND the public and they do absolutely zilch to support attorneys who pay $700+ per year for membership that is mandatory.
Here is on example: http://www.azaacpr.org/
Thanks for the link. Talk about a corrupt cabal.