Jump to content
BSUTOP25

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Recommended Posts

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/idaho-must-provide-sex-reassignment-surgery-trans-inmate-court-rules-n1046501

I’m all for LGBT equality rights but +++++ this shit. Start a gofundme or whatever but it is not the state’s burden to pay for gender reassignment. +++++ the 9th Circuit. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Cheers 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/idaho-must-provide-sex-reassignment-surgery-trans-inmate-court-rules-n1046501

I’m all for LGBT equality rights but +++++ this shit. Start a gofundme or whatever but it is not the state’s burden to pay for gender reassignment. +++++ the 9th Circuit. 

Go figure. This person is in prison for sexual assault on a minor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one more reason to say +++++ California and every democratic voter in it.  They created this shit.

  • Cheers 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Just one more reason to say +++++ California and every democratic voter in it.  They created this shit.

Trump sure has his warts and bad moments, but when you look at the aggressive appointment of judges across the country where he’s rallied to get sane judges that used to have left wing nut jobs is an amazing thing to see. 

This is a really great article how Trump has pretty much single handedly with the help of Mitchy reshaped the 9th Circuit Court for a looooooooong time. It started with an 11 seat lefty majority, and now just 3. Not sure if he can break the whole thing even or lead by 1 by the time his first term is up. A second term with a Senate majority would be almost too good to be true.

2016

20 Dem  9 GOP

2020

16 Dem  13 GOP

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/22/trump-judges-9th-circuit-appeals-court-088833

“A bastion of liberalism in the federal judiciary is slowly turning rightward, threatening Democratic court challenges on everything from abortion to who gets a green card.

The Senate confirmation of Lawrence VanDyke and Patrick Bumatay to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals this month brought to nine the number of appointments President Donald Trump has made to the 29-member bench that serves as the last stop for nearly all legal complaints lodged in nine Western states. Democratic-appointed judges now hold a 3 seat majority, compared with 11 at the start of Trump's presidency.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Nevada Convert said:

Before Trump there were only 2 moderate conservatives of the 19 judges on that court, and now they are about half of the court thanks to Trump’s very aggressive appointment of judges across the country. But apparently we need a couple more on the 9th to stop this nonsense. 

Cocaine Mitch has been amazing.  Packing the courts with conservative judges is the only chance we have to protect our constitutional rights.  I just wish they realized drugs should be decriminalized and weed legalized.  Same with prostitution.  Same with gambling.  

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Cocaine Mitch has been amazing.  Packing the courts with conservative justices is the only chance we have to protect our constitutional rights.  I just wish they realized drugs should be decriminalized and weed legalized.

I’m fixing my post. There’s 29 judges, not 19.

His upset of the century, or whatever, was so crucial with the courts and the direction of the country. Hillary would have had the Supreme Court dominated with lefty’s and I’m sure RBG would’ve retired already with Hillary. And then the 188 or so lower court judges he’s appointed would’ve be lefty’s. It was a huge election. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So great now Im going to be helping pay for a trans pedophile to have a sex change operation. I was going to say parole him, but then he would sexually assault some other poor kid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/idaho-must-provide-sex-reassignment-surgery-trans-inmate-court-rules-n1046501

I’m all for LGBT equality rights but +++++ this shit. Start a gofundme or whatever but it is not the state’s burden to pay for gender reassignment. +++++ the 9th Circuit. 

Welcome to California, Idaho!

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the outrage pointed in the right direction? Is it a rogue, activist, leftist judge taking the law into his/her own hands or a ruling based in the law and current medical standards and practices, however seemingly flawed those practices feel to some.

I read the nbc piece and the explanation of the ruling given by the court explained those things.

Before you jump down my throat understand this doesn't make sense to me either, I'm just questioning the attack on the judge here. 

Justice is not served by lobbying for left or right judges. That's judicial activism you're advocating for. That's legislating from the bench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/idaho-must-provide-sex-reassignment-surgery-trans-inmate-court-rules-n1046501

I’m all for LGBT equality rights but +++++ this shit. Start a gofundme or whatever but it is not the state’s burden to pay for gender reassignment. +++++ the 9th Circuit. 

These sorts of headlines are why the its hard to take the Democratic Party that seriously anymore...

They also went hard after Joe Rogan a while back (calling him Trans-Phobic), because he made the honest statement that it is not fair to female athletes for dudes to claim they are female, and then compete against women athletes. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Is the outage pointed in the right direction? Is it a rogue activist leftist judge taking the law into his/her own hands or a ruling based in the law and current medical standards and practices, however seemingly flawed those practices feel to some.

I read the nbc piece and the explanation of the ruling given my the court explained those things.

Before you jump down my throat understand this doesn't make sense to me either, I'm just questioning the attack on the judge here. 

This could be a case where the opposite of judicial activism occurred. 

Justice is not served by lobbying for left or right judges. That's judicial activism you're advocating for. That's legislating from the bench.

 

You make it sound like this Judge is not representative of the common thinking in the Democratic Party, and that this Judge is not common place in the 9th circuit. 

Sorry, but this seems to be representative of the Democratic Party on these issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Is the outrage pointed in the right direction? Is it a rogue, activist, leftist judge taking the law into his/her own hands or a ruling based in the law and current medical standards and practices, however seemingly flawed those practices feel to some.

I read the nbc piece and the explanation of the ruling given by the court explained those things.

Before you jump down my throat understand this doesn't make sense to me either, I'm just questioning the attack on the judge here. 

Justice is not served by lobbying for left or right judges. That's judicial activism you're advocating for. That's legislating from the bench.

"Conservative" judicial appointments tend to be originalists more far more often.  Legislating from the bench tends to happen more when you view the constitution as a living, breathing document.  

  • Cheers 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

"Conservative" judicial appointments tend to be originalists more far more often.  Legislating from the bench tends to happen more when you view the constitution as a living, breathing document.  

Okay, are you sure this judge didn't apply the law correctly, or are you upset in the outcome of the law.

My point is your beef might be with the law, not the ruling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, #1Stunner said:

 

You make it sound like this Judge is not representative of the common thinking in the Democratic Party, and that this Judge is not common place in the 9th circuit. 

Sorry, but this seems to be representative of the Democratic Party on these issues.

I don't make that argument. I'm independent just like you, friend. Right down the middle.

I'm just appealing to reason and the facts here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, toonkee said:

I don't make that argument. I'm independent just like you, friend. Right down the middle.

I'm just appealing to reason and the facts here.

 

So, you don't want to respond to the substance of what I just said?

Let me repeat the statement that you willfully ignored and did not respond to.

 

Quote

 

You make it sound like this Judge is not representative of the common thinking in the Democratic Party, and that this Judge is not common place in the 9th circuit. 

Sorry, but this seems to be representative of the Democratic Party on these issues.

 

 

I disagree with your premise that this particular judge is a "rogue activist judge", or was just applying the law.  (have you never heard of the 9th circuit?)  I think he's actually very representative of the Democratic Party and the 9th Circuit.

Do you disagree with this?  (Or are you going to give another non-response?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, toonkee said:

Okay, are you sure this judge didn't apply the law correctly, or are you upset in the outcome of the law.

My point is your beef might be with the law, not the ruling.

Well, it looks like it is going to the SCOUTS so we will find out.  I am guessing it is not a 5-4 decision.  Are you asking if I think her 8th amendment rights were violated?  No.  I do not.  The 5th circuit would agree with me and I bet the SCOTUS does as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, #1Stunner said:

So, you don't want to respond to the substance of what I just said?

Let me repeat the statement that you willfully ignored and did not respond to.

 

 

I disagree with your premise that this particular judge is a "rogue activist judge".  I think he's actually very representative of the Democratic Party and the 9th Circuit.

Do you disagree with this?  (Or are you going to give another non-response?)

No your putting words in my mouth and your attempting to force me to account for your game instead of mine. I didn't call the judge a rogue activist and I don't have to answer your loaded troll question mister 2 time troll derby winner.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, toonkee said:

Is the outrage pointed in the right direction? Is it a rogue, activist, leftist judge taking the law into his/her own hands or a ruling based in the law and current medical standards and practices, however seemingly flawed those practices feel to some.

I read the nbc piece and the explanation of the ruling given by the court explained those things.

Before you jump down my throat understand this doesn't make sense to me either, I'm just questioning the attack on the judge here. 

Justice is not served by lobbying for left or right judges. That's judicial activism you're advocating for. That's legislating from the bench.

 

14 minutes ago, toonkee said:

No your putting words in my mouth and your attempting to force me to account for your game instead of mine. I didn't call the judge a rogue activist and I don't have to answer your loaded troll question mister 2 time troll derby winner.

You still haven't answered my assertion that I think the 9th Circuit has a WELL EARNED reputation, and just keep dodging for some reason.  Why not have a discussion?

You haven't even explained why you think I asked a "loaded question"?   Because I said that 9th Circuit Ordering sex change operations seems to be a platform of the Democratic Party?  You disagree with this? (you seem unwilling to answer for some reason).

Now you are resorting to name calling, because you disagree with me?   Maybe I should troll you if that's what you really want.

 

I thought you wanted to discuss things.  Looks like you just wanted to hear yourself talk again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, toonkee said:

Is the outrage pointed in the right direction? Is it a rogue, activist, leftist judge taking the law into his/her own hands or a ruling based in the law and current medical standards and practices, however seemingly flawed those practices feel to some.

I read the nbc piece and the explanation of the ruling given by the court explained those things.

Before you jump down my throat understand this doesn't make sense to me either, I'm just questioning the attack on the judge here. 

Justice is not served by lobbying for left or right judges. That's judicial activism you're advocating for. That's legislating from the bench.

My “outrage” has nothing to do with the actual procedure. It has everything to do with Idaho taxpayers footing the bill.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×