I am atatempting to write an essay under the influence of a few vodkas and peach schnapps. So far I've managaed a small paragrapgh. It would be delihgytfil if anypony could offer some intellect towards the subject that I am desperately trying to configure whilst being in a tispy stayte. The essya question is: Are the US Supreme Court judges just politicians in robes? - Thsi is obviously an essay designated towards evaluating teh power of judical figures over chsnging times. It's dependant of the indivuidual judges as well as statisticla events at the time that could prove or disporve the influence that judges have in teh Supreme Couryt I'm now writing about the significant majority of right wing cinservative judges that ruled druing the Plessy v Ferguson cases, but I would apprciate any help from those who study the subject or American Bronies that happen to be politicaly savvy about ethier country and their judicialk system. PLEASE HELP!
american politics discuassion while drunk? challenging judges authrority,where have you been all my life
I've just woken up from a sleepy drunken nap, and now I'm facepalming myself. I do have a bit of a headache when I'm trying to think about American politics in my 'fragile' state, haha!
wedll anyways,it was a n intresting post,though i think due to the topics volatile nature,it will be deleted soon,but quite intresting,if youd like to continue it,feel free to PM me
Heehee, probably. I wasn't thinking when I posted it. Cheers for the offer! I've written just over a pgae so far and I'm slowly getting there.
I would take a look at some of these famous supreme court cases: http://www.east-buc.k12.ia.us/02_03/ag/sc_intro.htm The Supreme Court also reviews every law passed on whether or not they adhere to Constitutional Rights. Look for some controversial laws that were passed and see if there is information on the Judicial Branch's decisions on those laws.
Politicians in robes is quite a stretch. They're more like vanguards to political and moral theory... at least that's the way I see them. They also double as conduits for national law, however, they are so heavily bound by its interpretation, that that is the only way they can really maneuver to change it beneath its own banner.
