That is false. The conservatives have made it clear that they support the rule, but it needs to be done right. The real question is why are liberals willing to ignore the law?
> The real question is why are liberals willing to ignore the law?
I hope you don't get accidentally deported to a foreign prison by those lofty conservatives who are SO concerned with following the letter of the law.
But yeah, when a far right court digs up a technicality that just happens to serve the corporate interests that line the pockets of those who appointed these judges well... that's the justice you must truly value.
I do not defend conservatives when they don't follow the letter of the law. Except perhaps in cases where the law itself is unjust - however that is not your argument here so we can ignore that. There have also been cases where I didn't understand the full law and so have had to change my mind once I realized what I'm missing - but that doesn't seem to be the case here either.
On topic is a violation of the law. It isn't just a technicality here either, it is a big deal that when there are large effects of a potential rule we ensure we take the time to figure out what the real effects of it are. There are all too often unexpected downsides to some rule/law and when those downsides are bad enough the results can be worse than the problem you are trying to prevent. (it might not be in this case - but time was not given to figure out if that is the case so we don't know)
> The conservatives have made it clear that they support the rule, but it needs to be done right.
They have _said_ that they support the rule. In recent years, conservative judges have said a number of things that don't hold up to any amount of scrutiny.
You're completely brainwashed, this is sad to see. You're getting fucked over as much as the rest of us, but instead of fighting back you're asking for more. Purely out of spite and hate for us. How sad.
That is false. The conservatives have made it clear that they support the rule, but it needs to be done right. The real question is why are liberals willing to ignore the law?
> The real question is why are liberals willing to ignore the law?
I hope you don't get accidentally deported to a foreign prison by those lofty conservatives who are SO concerned with following the letter of the law.
But yeah, when a far right court digs up a technicality that just happens to serve the corporate interests that line the pockets of those who appointed these judges well... that's the justice you must truly value.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
I do not defend conservatives when they don't follow the letter of the law. Except perhaps in cases where the law itself is unjust - however that is not your argument here so we can ignore that. There have also been cases where I didn't understand the full law and so have had to change my mind once I realized what I'm missing - but that doesn't seem to be the case here either.
On topic is a violation of the law. It isn't just a technicality here either, it is a big deal that when there are large effects of a potential rule we ensure we take the time to figure out what the real effects of it are. There are all too often unexpected downsides to some rule/law and when those downsides are bad enough the results can be worse than the problem you are trying to prevent. (it might not be in this case - but time was not given to figure out if that is the case so we don't know)
1 reply →
> The conservatives have made it clear that they support the rule, but it needs to be done right.
They have _said_ that they support the rule. In recent years, conservative judges have said a number of things that don't hold up to any amount of scrutiny.
You're completely brainwashed, this is sad to see. You're getting fucked over as much as the rest of us, but instead of fighting back you're asking for more. Purely out of spite and hate for us. How sad.