Bye Bye 14th Amendment

[brettdale]

I guess they will start with people who are registered in swing states as a Democrat.

Well they probably start with the LGTB community, then Blacks, and non Christians.

[JohnSJ]

1. Only if they have the votes.

[getagrip_already]

3. Votes on the supreme court?

I think they have those.

[JohnSJ]

7. The SC doesn't repeal an amendment to the Constitution. That isn't under their jurisdiction.

[moniss]

8. They can basically nullify it with

adverse rulings in cases.

[JohnSJ]

9. The Supeme a court cannot nullify an amendment. That isn't how it is done. geez

To repeal a amendment requires at least 2/3 of both Houses of Congress to agree on the change, which must then be ratified (approved) by no less than 3/4 of all the states.

There are plenty of things to worry about, but that isn’t one of them.

[moniss]

10. If you read what I actually wrote rather than what

you think I wrote it might be more clear to you.

[JohnSJ]

11. I read it, and no they can't nullify an amendment with a contradicting ruling that violates the amendment. This

is not something that will happen.

[moniss]

13. No you didn't really read it.

Nobody is talking about a direct nullification. As cases are brought the decisions can, do and have in the past placed further and further restrictive interpretations on various amendments until the case law around the amendment basically nullifies the amendment. Liberal Supreme Courts typically are expansive in their ruling s towards the amendments and conservative courts restrict. For instance the tremendous expansion of the 2nd Amendment interpretation by successive conservative SC justices over the last many years versus their treatment of the 14th Amendment. The last decade with the Rehnquist Court and now the Roberts Court have been very hostile to the 14th for example and have rolled back use of it to base a "right to privacy" etc. The Warren Court was expansive of the 1st, 5th, 6th, 8th, 14th for example.

[JohnSJ]

15. ok, thanks for the explanation.

[Trueblue1968]

16. You wrong. They can not destroy amendments to thE constitution.

[moniss]

17. You haven't a clue.nt

[getagrip_already]

19. Really?

Then how was trump allowed to run for potus after having lead an insurrection when the constitution clearly forbids it?

Answer: scotus interpreted it to mean he could, nullifying that section of the amendment.

Another example? How does a single nutcase possessing an arsenal of modern weopons of mass destruction qualify as a well regulated militia as written by someone who lived almost 200 years ago? Same answer, scotus interprets it and changes its meaning.

The constitution only means what 5 appointed people say it means on any question brought before it. And they can either grant it new powers, or take away those it has.

[Crunchy Frog]

12. They can interpret it out of existence.

[Beachnutt]

2. Muslim they hate Muslim folks and

and they also hate poor folks.

[GoreWon2000]

4. The 14th amendment died in 2000

when the repug SCOTUS majority said it was ok to count repug votes while at the same time NOT counting dem votes in Florida. Equal protection was clearly only for repug votes.

[yankee87]

5. Father of LGBTQ

I must admit, I'm more than a little nervous.

[Skittles]

6. we are with you too

yes indeed

[Initech]

14. Just remember the real enemies in this are the Heritage Foundation and Fox News.

They are the "enemy from within". Our country is being held hostage by a sadistic think tank run by maniacal billionaires and a vindictive propaganda outlet that calls itself a "news" channel.

[peregrinus]

18. FoxNews had the "Patriot Awards"

Last ‘night. I’d never heard of it. It was exactly what you’d expect hosted by Sean Hannity. They cracked jokes about being compared to Nazis.

[Initech]

20. I saw they gave Fuckface an "honorary patriot of the year" award.

That’s some serious third world dictator shit there.