Originally Posted by
dawg80
We are a Republic...a nation of laws. Those laws can only be made by legislative bodies...duly elected (no cheating allowed). As I have mentioned on several occasions, RBG said the SC should NOT have made law, state legislatures are charged with that authority. That is what I am talking about. Just apply that example to other situations and you basically have my view of it all. And NO, I don't think a judge making a ruling, creating a "law," and then calling it "precedent" means a damn thing! It is an illegal law, an unconstitutional law, and holds no merit. Might be "cute" but I can't be any clearer than that.
More...all courts can really do, or mostly do, is check each other. For instance, when the Penn SC declared that the Dems could cheat in the election, changing what the Penn legislature had already made law, that decision should have been appealed to whatever court oversees the Penn SC...or, since it was all in-state, the legislature should have ignored the Penn SC's ruling, given it had no authority to rule on the matter.