jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (5 posts)

Supreme Court of The United States

  1. tirelesstraveler profile image87
    tirelesstravelerposted 18 months ago

    Currently 9 men and women comprise the Supreme Court of the United States. It has not always been 9 members.  This supreme court of the land includes men and women who are appointed by president and confirmed by the senate.  My contention is these are ruling parties and therefore skew the court to there own liking. Judges are supposed to be impartial, but they are just people.  Some judges are better at following the constitution and law than others.

    As the court is about to rule on some high profile cases it is essential we remember Plessy v Ferguson in which SCOUS  ruled states had an obligation to segregate schools, lunch counters (separate but equal) etc.

    1. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 18 months ago in reply to this

      "My contention is these are ruling parties and therefore skew the court to there own liking."

      This has been my complaint for years. Who would wish to go to court with a judge who leans anyway but the middle. The impartiality should remain impeccable and without cause for recourse. If you listen to the senate confirmation hearings when they are charged in confirming these judges you are taken to liberal heaven and conservative la la land with the questions and the answers they want to hear. I love the hypothetical questions especially as the inquisitors back the nominee into a corner to explain their feelings on a made up situation paraphrasing supposed related testimony to manipulate a stand. Each case is different and should stand on its own merit which requires a impartial determination. Unfortunately what we have now are conservative and liberal plants by both parties.

      Its almost like a Tribal Council vote on Survivor where one alliance gangs up on the other. The real heartburn is when one burns their alliance.

    2. Credence2 profile image84
      Credence2posted 18 months ago in reply to this

      I would not say that the court decision obligated the states in question to employ Jim Crow, it just allowed them to do so.

    3. Quilligrapher profile image90
      Quilligrapherposted 17 months ago in reply to this

      Greetings TT.

      Your statement is totally incorrect. In Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court did not rule that states had an obligation to segregate schools, lunch counters, etc.. To the contrary, the court ruled in a 7-1 decision that Louisiana’s Separate Car Act (1890) did not violate either the 13th Amendment, which prohibited slavery, or the Fourteenth Amendment, which granted full and equal citizenship to Black Americans.

      For more about the legal nuances debated by the court, I suggest...
      https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/163/537, and...
      http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top … v-Ferguson

      Meanwhile, I am looking forward to a vigorous debate about impartiality.

  2. tirelesstraveler profile image87
    tirelesstravelerposted 17 months ago

    Quilligrapher, You are absolutely correct, and the resulting outcome was since, segregation when separate but equal, was totally within the constitution guidelines states therefore had the right to do so.