kwc Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:00 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:00 AM This is disturbing... The Washington Times reports that Judge Posner (7th Circuit Court of Appeals) sees no value in studying the Constitution: Seventh Circuit Judge Richard Posner sees absolutely no value in studying the U.S. Constitution because eighteenth-century guys couldn't have possibly foreseen the culture and technology of today. In a recent op-ed for Slate, Judge Posner, a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, argued that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post-Civil War amendments do not speak to today. "I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries--well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments)," he wrote. "Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21st century." He added, "let's not let the dead bury the living." Judge Posner, an outspoken opponent of late Justice Antonin Scalia, also blasted absurd posthumous encomia for the late conservative. Here's the link: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/27/richard-posner-no-value-in-studying-us-constitutio/ . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCroskey Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:16 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:16 AM He's an odd man. Sometimes he's really really right, other times he acts like he's lost his mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Googe1227 Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:30 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:30 AM I saw this earlier today. Unbelievable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singlecoilpickup Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:41 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:41 AM Wow. That should be grounds for removal from the bench. Without the constitution we have nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:56 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:56 AM That's why I give him so much credit for Moore/Shepard. He didn't think Heller was correctly decided but but knew he was bound by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RECarry Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:33 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:33 AM Posner discredits 18th Century old men for not anticipating "modern society" (yawn), but is arrogant enough to presume his rulings are valid for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xrlke Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:49 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:49 AM I whole heartedly disagree. I am a firm believer that there are few men in today's world that have half of the intellect and drive to accomplish what out founders did. I wish I had the time and intellect to fully read and understand all of their writings, let alone the most important document in human history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeardswithoutOperators Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:10 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:10 AM I sense a hit comedy tv show... "The US Constitution, according to Posner." ...I'm sorry citizen, you like listening to Led Zeppelin? Clearly those old farts didn't know how to create music for our generation, so you should totally stop listening to their stone cold tracks. Here, listen to One Direction, they completely understand the plight of the common man today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevWildman Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:18 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:18 AM It is always interesting and shameful when a judge, in this case, or an office holder, makes statements like this, when they have sworn to uphold and defend the document they so disparage in their oaths of office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borgranta Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:21 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:21 AM Life according to posner would mean that no one would have a right to privacy if using anything more high tech than a telegragh. Life according posner would mean no right to own modern firearms. Lofe according to posner means the cops can search your cell phone without a warrant. Life according to posner means the government can deny everyone access to the internet because it did not exist during the founding. Life according to posner means the government can ban access to vehicles and modern medicine since neither was available back in the founding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwc Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:47 AM Author Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:47 AM That's why I give him so much credit for Moore/Shepard. He didn't think Heller was correctly decided but but knew he was bound by it. Yes--we are grateful for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallbore Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:50 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 02:50 AM Technology changes but man does not. Our fore fathers understood this. Our Constitution is just as important today. Without a standard for law no one knows what is legal. This is a direct attack on individual freedom.Too many judges want the power to make law on a whim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted June 28, 2016 at 03:01 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 03:01 AM Oh. My. Goodness. So how are judges supposed to uphold the Constitution if they do not study it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papa Posted June 28, 2016 at 03:30 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 03:30 AM Oh. My. Goodness. So how are judges supposed to uphold the Constitution if they do not study it? $ Flip a coin! $ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallbore Posted June 28, 2016 at 03:47 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 03:47 AM Many national governments were first established by a constitution but that was all the constitution was used for. From then on the government was free to do as it pleased. This is the thinking of liberals. They do not what to be restrained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DD123 Posted June 28, 2016 at 04:56 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 04:56 AM Wow. That type of rhetoric from someone who swore to uphold the constitution makes me envision slapping him until the screws readjust themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPistol Posted June 28, 2016 at 10:29 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 10:29 AM LWW-ism = rejection of reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTX63 Posted June 28, 2016 at 11:57 AM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 11:57 AM Sounds to me like he just stumping for the next SCOTUS nomination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwc Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:31 PM Author Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 12:31 PM Sounds to me like he just stumping for the next SCOTUS nomination. If he was about 20 years younger, based in these statements, Posner would fit the perfect profile for a Hillary nomination. Oh... then again, there is that 'pesky' Moore decision... which might have taken him off of her list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:30 PM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:30 PM The Constitution is a set of "rules" that he swore to uphold. If he believes they have no value, how is he to do his job? If any of us were to believe the rules at our work had no value, we would be searching for new work tomorrow. How can he be allowed to continue to work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tvandermyde Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:41 PM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 01:41 PM If we had real senators I would say time for impeachment. But not with the two dolts we have now. Maybe some letters to Grassley might help. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xwing Posted June 28, 2016 at 04:00 PM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 04:00 PM That's terrible! Pretty funny that he's the man who decided Moore, which brought Illinois kicking and screaming into allowing CCW. I'm glad he at least got that one right, due to the guidance from USSC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tvandermyde Posted June 28, 2016 at 04:09 PM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 04:09 PM he only decided Moore as a flipping of the bird to Scalia and trying to dump the whole thing in his lap. But AG Madigan would not appeal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hap Posted June 28, 2016 at 07:28 PM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 07:28 PM Well, Posner did take the usual oath of office. On the other hand he probably thinks we shouldn't take that any more seriously than we should take the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richp Posted June 28, 2016 at 07:42 PM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 07:42 PM Hi, By this statement, it may be that he has, in effect, renounced his oath of office. Not that political will remains in this country to do anything like exploring that further... FWIW. Rich Phillips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hap Posted June 28, 2016 at 10:11 PM Share Posted June 28, 2016 at 10:11 PM That's exactly what I meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted June 29, 2016 at 02:49 AM Share Posted June 29, 2016 at 02:49 AM A judge that doesn't believe in the Constitution should be impeached. Plain and simple. I'm not referring to Posner specifically. Any judge. Right on down to the circuit judges here in state court. Just refer to the Oath he took, referring to the adhering to the Constitution part of the Oath. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transplant Posted June 29, 2016 at 02:50 AM Share Posted June 29, 2016 at 02:50 AM A judge that doesn't believe in the Constitution should be impeached. Plain and simple. I'm not referring to Posner specifically. Any judge. Right on down to the circuit judges here in state court. Just refer to the Oath he took, referring to the adhering to the Constitution part of the Oath. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk How do we get that started? There's both a process component, and a political component. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangebrew Posted June 29, 2016 at 03:08 AM Share Posted June 29, 2016 at 03:08 AM he only decided Moore as a flipping of the bird to Scalia and trying to dump the whole thing in his lap. But AG Madigan would not appealAnd I've always wondered why she didn't appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoadyRunner Posted June 29, 2016 at 03:30 AM Share Posted June 29, 2016 at 03:30 AM he only decided Moore as a flipping of the bird to Scalia and trying to dump the whole thing in his lap. But AG Madigan would not appeal And I've always wondered why she didn't appeal. Probably asked not to by Bloomberg and co - so as not to risk setting a National precident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.