Do judges have an obligation to rule based on REALITY or LAWS?

[DrPepper12]

NO ONE disputes ANY POTUS has the authority given to him/her by Congressional legislation. Anyone who does is a moron. That's said, in the case of insurrection, if the POTUS relies on that legislation to claim the authority given to him / her, and the legislation states that "presidential determination" is the "switch" to activate the authority granted, MUST there be an ACTUAL BONA FIDE IRL INSURRECTION in progress (as that word is understood by POTUS) or should judges use their own SENSES, the "reasonable man" test, actual REALITY as determined by a majority/plurality of citizens or any other standard?

AKA, can the duly elected POTUS determine what REALITY is?

Do judges have an obligation to assess / intervene as to WHAT EXACTLY IS REALITY or a duty to follow the letter of the law?

POTUS is the assessor of FACTS. Judges assess law AS WRITTEN

Judges have a duty to BOTH "de jure" & "de facto" circumstances

[OneViewpoint]

I have another question. What course of action is left to the people when all three branches of government have been corrupted and are acting against the interest of citizens to please the wealthy few who have bought the politicians and the courts?

Call it an Oligarchy, Aristocracy, King, Emperor, Dictatorship, Fascism, or whatever you want. What is the end game?

[DrPepper12]

It's the ppls duty to overthrow a govt that does not protect natural rights

[loveslongnails]

Judges have a duty to weigh all factors, not just the written law, especially archaic law.

[msc545]

In a court of law (as opposed to equity) Judges are obligated to rule in accord with the Law, not subjective factors.

[DrPepper12]

So then REALITY is subjective? Whatever POTUS says it is?

[msc545]

Reality is whatever a judge in a court of equity rules, and unfortunately, reality seems to be whatever POTUS says it is these days. That really creates a lot of trouble, as you can tell.

[DrPepper12]

Yeah. It sure does when the obviously mentally ill person is given power.

[exitseven]

yes it is.

[exitseven]

@msc545 Can you point to an example where President Trump disobeyed federal law in anything?

[msc545]

Yes, he did not due process to immigrants. Part of the Constitution says that everybody in the United States is entitled to due process. He denied due process to these people and in doing so violated federal law.

[DrPepper12]

Hatch act. Murdered people in boats. Emouluments clause. Refusing subpoenas. J6. Tik tok law non enforcement. Judicial & diplomatic appointments.

High crimes & misdemeaners

[seeyounexttuesday]

Wait, I thought you clowns thought we had a king ruling the country.

[DrPepper12]

No we have a wanna be sociopathic narcissist authoritarian monarchical dumfuq the founders warned us about.

[seeyounexttuesday]

YEah, but he dropped out of the race and was replaced by his VP. Who lost to Trump

[exitseven]

Judges are supposed to be impartial and non partisan. Thet is not what we have been seeing in Bidens weaponized system.

[DrPepper12]

That's not what I'm asking. Do they have to be neutral when REALITY doesn't back up POTUS?

[exitseven]

That is not even a question. The grownups are back in charge and the only problems with the legal system is coming from judges that keep letting the same criminals out time and time again and prevent ICE from enforcing federal immigration laws.

[DrPepper12]

Avoidance again

[exitseven]

No it is just the fact we have a Constitutional president and the only real law and order candidate. If a judge is in fact non partisan it will not be an issue.

[Anonymous]

Lawns are made by government and judges e force laws and democracy

[Opinion Owner]

Laws

[chrissykerdock]

it seems they don't

[ilistengood]

In the strictest sense of the word yes

[WindAtMyBack]

Give it a fucking rest already.

[DrPepper12]

Too many polysyllabic words?