I’m no lawyer, but this wager doesn’t seem to make sense. How can the Supreme Court rule on the constitutionality of a person’s actions? Their role is to interpret law, correct?
Are you trying to say that you believe the Supreme Court will rule that the law the President broke is unconstitutional? That implies that you believe he broke a law, right?
That was just a pathetic attempt.
No, it really wasn’t. It was a simple question. Does the Supreme Court rule on the constitutionality of a person’s actions? Seriously…save the mock outrage and overblown language and answer the question; I don’t have the patience to play the partisan games in this forum anymore. I honestly just want some clarification on what this wager, and more importantly this issue, is about. If what I’ve described is not accurate help me understand your position. Stop reading sarcasm that isn’t there into my posts, and stop wasting my time by injecting it into your responses to mine, please.
Ok. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. I really didn’t think you were that ignorant.
Someone will file a lawsuit (I think it’s already happened) saying their rights were violated and that the president violated FISA. Then the case will work it’s way to the Supreme Court, where they will rule that FISA was an unconstitutional limit on presidential powers.
Well you’ve learned a valuable lesson I suppose. In the future, you should definitely assume that I am ignorant as to what you, and others, are thinking. I do not read minds.
So, in essence, you gave me a bunch of shit to, in the end, tell me I had correctly interpreted your position on the issue? Yup, I’m in the T-Nation Politics Forum. Not for long though…have fun with this little game you play here guys…
No, my position is not that the president broke a law. My position is that Congress passed an unconstitutional law.[/quote]
Weird that the admin doesn’t think so.