Posted On: 10/22/2016 5:31:59 PM
Post# of 65629
You missed my entire point.
First of all the so called 'standard of care' ruse in TX was a convoluted restructuring of building hallways that were by no means
'sub-standard'.
That was patently obvious to the federal courts that ruled against TX.
I raised civil rights and voting rights as examples of federal courts upholding those LAWS, no constitutional amendment required.
Now either you were ignorant of 'judicial review' or you simply don't like it when its rulings go against what you 'believe'.
You are never going to be satisfied with secular court rulings that go against what you believe and that makes those rulings de jure librul in your opinion.
Case closed. Jury dismissed. Thank you for your service.
First of all the so called 'standard of care' ruse in TX was a convoluted restructuring of building hallways that were by no means
'sub-standard'.
That was patently obvious to the federal courts that ruled against TX.
I raised civil rights and voting rights as examples of federal courts upholding those LAWS, no constitutional amendment required.
Now either you were ignorant of 'judicial review' or you simply don't like it when its rulings go against what you 'believe'.
You are never going to be satisfied with secular court rulings that go against what you believe and that makes those rulings de jure librul in your opinion.
Case closed. Jury dismissed. Thank you for your service.
(0)
(1)
