Democrat Proposes Illegal Laws

[MerchantofMenace]

Mayor Nutter, A Democrat is proposing laws that violate a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

 

[Maren]

Mayor Nutter, A Democrat is proposing laws that violate a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

I see little difference between what the Mayor is doing and what South Dakota attempted to do when they passed a law prohibiting abortions. In both case they are challenging the way the constitution is defined by the Supreme Court after a change in the membership of the Supreme Court (though South Dakota was challenging Federal law, the mayor is challenging Pennsylvania law). This is no different.

 

[MerchantofMenace]

I see little difference between what the Mayor is doing and what South Dakota attempted to do when they passed a law prohibiting abortions. In both case they are challenging the way the constitution is defined by the Supreme Court after a change in the membership of the Supreme Court (though South Dakota was challenging Federal law, the mayor is challenging Pennsylvania law). This is no different.

It didn't take long for the "Republicans do it too" defense.

Heh.

 

[Maren]

It didn't take long for the "Republicans do it too" defense.

Heh.

I don't recall mentioning a political party. I personally see the OP (which does not match the article title) as a rather lame attempt to make it a partisan issue.

 

[MerchantofMenace]

I don't recall mentioning a political party. I personally see the OP (which does not match the article title) as a rather lame attempt to make it a partisan issue.

Well, the Nutter is a Democrat.

 

[clarksided]

Pat Roberston is a republican.

"Republican says God told him about a coming nuclear attack on America"

Partisanship is stupid and petty. This is an article worthy of discussion, but instead of intelligent discussion, all we'll get now are back and forth attacks from each party. You've ruined any serious debate before it could even start. Grow up.

 

[OutsideNormal]

Well, the Nutter is a Democrat.

And, you are the only one making it a partisan issue. The plain truth is that yes there are democrats that make laws that are either unconstitutional federally or in their state. There are also Republicans who do the same thing. Further, now defunct political parties did this also, and it doesn't just happen in the U.S. Plainly, the only reasonable conclusion is that there are some politican's who don't understand when they are told by the courts that a law is unconstitutional that the courts will not likely change their minds just because an identical or substantially similar law has been made again.

 

[JustOneWay]

Mayor Nutter, A Democrat is proposing laws that violate a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The article stated nothing about the mayor's bill as being illegal. Can you explain why it is illegal then prove it by posting the law that claims it is illegal?

 

[Verv]

I see little difference between what the Mayor is doing and what South Dakota attempted to do when they passed a law prohibiting abortions. In both case they are challenging the way the constitution is defined by the Supreme Court after a change in the membership of the Supreme Court (though South Dakota was challenging Federal law, the mayor is challenging Pennsylvania law). This is no different.

In a way you are kind of right, but I think that in one case this is viewed as knowledgable resistance against the murder of babies, while the other it is a bureaucrat fighting a bureaucrats war for gun control laws.

I admire any form of resistance against the murder of the unborn for the convenience of the irresponsible.

 

[Maren]

In a way you are kind of right, but I think that in one case this is viewed as knowledgable resistance against the murder of babies, while the other it is a bureaucrat fighting a bureaucrats war for gun control laws.

I admire any form of resistance against the murder of the unborn for the convenience of the irresponsible.

And in the other case it is a direct response to try and prevent what is legally murder. That you feel it is bureaucratic and will not work is nothing more than your opinion, just as those that support this law have the opinion that it will be effective in reducing the number of people murdered.

 

[imind]

I admire any form of resistance against the murder of the unborn for the convenience of the irresponsible.

so all women who get abortions are irresponsible, or this simply another oversimplified appeal to emotion?

 

[Parmenio]

I really don't like the law he's trying to pass, but it seems odd that a Republican would be bashing the local government's attempt at governance. Since, I've always taken Republicans to be more pro small government and local government.

Where is the outcry against activist judges on this one? I personally abhor this ruling. There is no reason for local governments to not be able to police themselves if there is no contradiction in higher levels. (Meaning: If there are no state or federal laws with which the local ordinances come into direct conflict, there is no reason to restrict the municipalities)
I personally have two handguns, a CHL, a shotgun, and a rifle. I'm not really a fan of "gun control", but to back a ruling that is against your core principles simply because it happens to agree with another of your stances is insane. It is also extremely unprincipled.

 

[trunks2k]

The article stated nothing about the mayor's bill as being illegal. Can you explain why it is illegal then prove it by posting the law that claims it is illegal?

It mentions that the State Supreme Court has already ruled that individual cities cannot enforce their own set of gun control laws, which is what Nutter is trying to do.

 

[trunks2k]

Well, the Nutter is a Democrat.

His political affiliation should be separate from the issue at hand unless it's critical to the discussion. Fact is, both sides of the aisle take similar actions as Nutter has from time to time. But you made it a political discussion before the discussion even began by saying "Democrat Proposes Illegal Laws". With that title, you are taking a shot at Democrats, not Michael Nutter or the law he intends to enforce.

And even more worse is you say "the Nutter" which is silly, childish name calling.

 

[burrow_owl]

I see little difference between what the Mayor is doing and what South Dakota attempted to do when they passed a law prohibiting abortions.

Here's the difference: the S.D. law, as I understand, would have been either a law that would spring back into action if the SCOTUS overturned Roe, or done with the intent of forcing a legal challenge. By contrast, the Philly council is just looking to enforce a flatly (state) unconstitutional law. I'm a democrat, but the law is the law.

With that title, you are taking a shot at Democrats, not Michael Nutter or the law he intends to enforce.

And even more worse is you say "the Nutter" which is silly, childish name calling.

Not for nothing, but I'd do either, too. The important difference is that I'd be correct in my contention that the GOP is the party of lawlessness (see, eg: waterboarding, FISA, the Unitary Executive), and my childish name calling would be similarly correct.

 

[MerchantofMenace]

LOL.

This thread has been the subject of a report.

Someone, presumably either a Democrat, or a Republican who took offense at my post, not that I'm mentioning any names, but I only saw one of those posting here, apparently doesn't like it when Democrats are exposed.

LOL.

 

[Parmenio]

LOL.

This thread has been the subject of a report.

Someone, presumably either a Democrat, or a Republican who took offense at my post, not that I'm mentioning any names, but I only saw one of those posting here, apparently doesn't like it when Democrats are exposed.

LOL.

Did you even read my post?

How could you possibly exult in the court overriding the city's ability to govern itself? This is conservative 101 stuff here. Big Brother only gets a say if it is absolutely necessary, and, honestly, I don't see how the court could possibly have a say in this issue unless there was already a state law mandating gun control laws.

You might be all about your 2nd Amendment, and that's fine, but how do you sacrifice the basic conservative desire for small government? And all just to bash some stupid democrat.

 

[BrainHertz]

Mayor Nutter, A Democrat is proposing laws that violate a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

In what way "illegal"?

What he seems to be doing is lining up a state supreme court case, which is how constitutional matters get settled. There's nothing stupid or illegal about that; it's just the way the system works.