RT @curtdoolittle: @Asha2044635 @FedSoc –“What is this about?”–
In the abstract it is about (1) whether the people are sovereign or the…
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-22 01:39:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760479314867294536
RT @curtdoolittle: @Asha2044635 @FedSoc –“What is this about?”–
In the abstract it is about (1) whether the people are sovereign or the…
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-22 01:39:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760479314867294536
–“What is this about?”–
In the abstract it is about (1) whether the people are sovereign or the state or the court (the people) (2) whether the natural law (reciprocity, tort, demonstrated interest, individual sovereignty) provides universal decidability (yes), (3) and whether the injection of jewish authoritarian legal thought (Rez, Kelsen, Dworkin, Hartt), like jewish marxist thought, can replace our 5000 years of sovereignty by demand for commonality in positiva legislation and concurrency in negativa findings of the court (no) (4) or whether we will continue the reforms started by Scalia to restore our law and our sovereignty, or whether the destruction of rule of law will continue just as the destruction of our culture, institutions, history, civilization, and frankly – genome – will succeed.
So it’s THE question. The rest is just noise.
Reply addressees: @Asha2044635 @FedSoc
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-21 19:17:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760383290303807488
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760281458491457832
Legal Decidability.
1. Who is sovereign: People, parliament, king, dictator?
2. Legitimacy via commonality of dispute resolution in court (via negativa). Where commonality of findings in court across cases and regions is empirical evidence of legitimacy.
3. Legitimacy via concurrency in voting (via positiva). Where concurrency produces legitimacy by tests agreement across classes and regions as defense of minority positions against the tyranny of the majority.
4. If the people are sovereign, possessing self determination, then both commonality and concurrency are necessary.
For example the British parliament is sovereign, not the people vs the American people are ostensively sovereign not the government.
5. Western law is empirical not philosophical. We invented science as an extension of our law. We invented law as an extension of our politics. We invented our politics out of necessity of organizing groups of families to venture out on the steppe.
Cheers
Reply addressees: @whatifalthist @FedSoc
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-21 15:21:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760323814125146113
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760174170577514841
–“Originalism is Inconsistent with Stare Decisis and Other Aspects of Our Constitutional Practice?”—@FedSoc
Absolutely not. Originalism forces congress, limited by concurrency, to deliberately changing legislation and regulation, thus prohibiting legislation from the bench, and limiting the court by use of commonality, to decidability and prohibiting discretion.
Precedent is counsel on commonality, not decidability.
Stare Decisis produces evidence supporting commonality – it is not tested by proof of concurrency in the legislature. You are effectively advocating for legislative unaccountability. And throwing bad legislation over the wall into the market for conflict to be resolved by legislation from the bench.
The speaker is advocating violating sovereignty of the people under the contract of the constitution.
If you don’t understand sovereignty, concurrency and commonality why are you practicing law?
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-21 01:35:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760115902601658369
RT @ThruTheHayes: ON THE AMERICAN UNION
By: @LukeWeinhagen
(It’s) a romantic relationship that never should have been recognized…
The re…
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-18 03:08:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1759052228344643905
JOHN VICTOR – OUR GREAT COMMUNICATOR – ON THE PROBLEMS OF THE LEGISLATURE
The Founding Fathers Left Open Doors to Evil https://youtu.be/Lop3tG0ubKo?si=K3YF94inDNe2SCCz
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-16 23:51:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1758640371436052728
JOHN VICTOR – OUR GREAT COMMUNICATOR – ON THE PROBLEMS OF THE LEGISLATURE
The Founding Fathers Left Open Doors to Evil https://t.co/rOllRRZJI6
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-16 23:51:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1758640371305996288
JOHN VICTOR – AGAIN OUR GREAT COMMUNICATOR
The President Position: The Founding Fathers’ Mistake https://youtu.be/pLj2PeJ7dp0?si=0oAtJh8zEHPN8CHj
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-16 23:47:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1758639271144223057
JOHN VICTOR – AGAIN OUR GREAT COMMUNICATOR
The President Position: The Founding Fathers’ Mistake https://t.co/YQ6iOgIqZA
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-16 23:47:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1758639271031013376
RT @ThruTheHayes: TESTIMONY
Free speech ought be framed as the freedom to truthfully testify. The idea behind the amendment was not for on…
Source date (UTC): 2024-02-14 18:19:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1757832008871358593