America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 7 days ago by rfenst. 20 replies replies.
Judges and lawyers are better than us.
ZRX1200 Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,628
“The 2nd Amendment has no place in this courtroom, this is NYC”

~ Abena Darkeh

(Hon. Removed for practical purposes)
DrMaddVibe Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,507
I'm not sure what part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" anyone has a hard time understanding.
MidnightToker( • )( • ) Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 10-20-2023
Posts: 885
She is Full of crap
I been waiting to use that
Abrignac Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,327
See it for what it is and move on. It’s fairly obvious that she is anti-gun. She also realizes that every step an appellee takes in the judicial process costs money. She is also well away that the higher up the ladder a person appeals the higher the cost for each subsequent step. So essentially what she’s saying is “I know I’ll eventually get overruled, but at least I can force you to spend more money in the process.”
Speyside2 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,419
This is a big meh, there are far left and far right judges. They seem to think they can forget the constitution. They can't. Anthony is correct in the above.
jeebling Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,276
When a judge says that the Constitution doesn’t fly in their courtroom and then makes their ruling follow that ideology, I think they should be disbarred. Right or left, I don’t discriminate on political party or affiliation. If I give “my side” a pass then it will surely come back in spades.
ZRX1200 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,628
Yeah I don’t think it’s no big deal…..

This country wasn’t made great by that line of thinking.

But it sure has gone to 💩 with that acceptance and the same types asking for status quo.
Abrignac Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,327
No saying I agree or disagree with the judge. My opinion of her should be pretty apparent to anyone who pays if only the slightest attention to what I post.


I merely commented regarding the sorry state of affairs.
rfenst Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,360
jeebling wrote:
When a judge says that the Constitution doesn’t fly in their courtroom and then makes their ruling follow that ideology, I think they should be disbarred. Right or left, I don’t discriminate on political party or affiliation. If I give “my side” a pass then it will surely come back in spades.

ARE YOU OF THE OPINION THAT NO JUDGE CAN DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL?
Abrignac Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,327
rfenst wrote:
ARE YOU OF THE OPINION THAT NO JUDGE CAN DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL?


I’m definitely of the opinion that a judge CANNOT nullify an amendment to the Constitution. IIRC from my HS civics class that requires passage by a supermajority in both chambers of Congress followed by ratification of a supermajority of the states.

As far a a single judge declaring a law unconstitutional that’s ultimately meaningless unless higher courts concur. The ultimate authority on the constitutionality of a law is the nine member SCOTUS. So in reality it takes at least 5 judges agreeing before a law is officially deemed unconstitutional.
jeebling Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,276
rfenst wrote:
ARE YOU OF THE OPINION THAT NO JUDGE CAN DECLARE A LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL?


No. But I am of the opinion that no judge can defy the Constitution by saying that an amendment does not apply in her courtroom. I guess you disagree with me if I read the ALL CAPS properly.
rfenst Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,360
jeebling wrote:
No. But I am of the opinion that no judge can defy the Constitution by saying that an amendment does not apply in her courtroom. I guess you disagree with me if I read the ALL CAPS properly.

Sorry for the all Caps. Computer took a chit for a few minutes.
jeebling Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,276
rfenst, no worries. I thought you might be upset but I know how it goes with computers 🥸
MACS Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,823
Abrignac wrote:
See it for what it is and move on. It’s fairly obvious that she is anti-gun. She also realizes that every step an appellee takes in the judicial process costs money. She is also well away that the higher up the ladder a person appeals the higher the cost for each subsequent step. So essentially what she’s saying is “I know I’ll eventually get overruled, but at least I can force you to spend more money in the process.”


That should be grounds for disbarring. Knowingly making a ruling that is wrong as a punishment??

The 2nd amendment wasn't written into the constitution for self protection... it was written to allow the people to overthrow a corrupt gov't. We've reached that point.
fishinguitarman Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,152
you're half right
ZRX1200 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,628
I understand this is a NY judge, and I’m not one of the lizard brained muh rights guys….that was a highly inappropriate thing for her to say.

And it wasn’t her only wrong action in this case.

Yes litigants get appeals and possibly ultimately SCOTUS. But this is how the left has waged war on all kinds of rights. That’s not even my biggest issue though it’s these actions not being discussed for what they are and what it means. We have a largely idiotic society and we have a decidedly emotional conversation ruling the public square day.

This aren’t far from a very dark direction.
fishinguitarman Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,152
jeebling wrote:
No. But I am of the opinion that no judge can defy the Constitution by saying that an amendment does not apply in her courtroom. I guess you disagree with me if I read the ALL CAPS properly.



Dead ON !!!!
ZRX1200 Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,628
Well they’re actively ignoring SCOTUS decisions already….
jeebling Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 08-04-2015
Posts: 1,276
ZRX1200 wrote:
I understand this is a NY judge, and I’m not one of the lizard brained muh rights guys….that was a highly inappropriate thing for her to say.

And it wasn’t her only wrong action in this case.

Yes litigants get appeals and possibly ultimately SCOTUS. But this is how the left has waged war on all kinds of rights. That’s not even my biggest issue though it’s these actions not being discussed for what they are and what it means. We have a largely idiotic society and we have a decidedly emotional conversation ruling the public square day.

This aren’t far from a very dark direction.


As a lizard brained mah rights guy representative I’d like to build a coalition with you. 🥸
rfenst Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,360
MACS wrote:
That should be grounds for disbarring. Knowingly making a ruling that is wrong as a punishment??

The 2nd amendment wasn't written into the constitution for self protection... it was written to allow the people to overthrow a corrupt gov't. We've reached that point.

The correct way to deal with an inappropriate ruling, should one occur, is to appeal. That's it. If a judge f's things up in a major way, they get harshly scolded, publicly, by the appellate courts. , IMO, if they have a consistent problem getting things right (25% of trial judges don't), they should be removed from the bench by election or the relevant legislature.
Users browsing this topic
Guest