> cHat wrote:
> And what does this have to do directly with Bush OR about passing
> judgement on Law as a whole?
>
> Yes it's about a member of the Bush administration and yes he made
> statements that state that the judicial branch should defer to the
> will of the other two branches of government when ruling on
> terrorist-related cases.

You answered your own question.  It's not as if Gonzales if going out
on a limb without Bush's approval: he's directly speaking for the
President on legal issues.

And the administration's, i.e. Bush's, position is that judges are not
fit to judge law.  Of course he's saying "national security" law, but
our law doesn't make a distinction on this; we don't have specialty
judges.

It'd be like saying "judges should be able to rule on the second
amendment, but on the 3rd and 5th they should defer to congress".
That's another way of saying that the judicial branch shouldn't exist.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 
Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs 
http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:225105
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to