I don’t agree with this. Political parties didn’t exist at the time of the writing of the Constitution. They came about during the Washington administration when the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans disagreed about how strong of power the federal government should have vis-a-vis that of the states.
Does he do actuarial work too?
And the majority of those disagreeing during the Washington Administration WERE the Founding Fathers.
Politicized the Supreme Court is American as Apple Pie and believing romanticized lies about the country’s origin.
I think they were well-intentioned when they wrote the Constitution. That was several years before all the political in-fighting led to the partisan situation that came as Washington was leaving office.
2 Likes
I’m sure they were well-intentioned. But i don’t think they did a great job. One thing the past several years has taught me is that our founding fathers weren’t prescient and we have an awkward constitution with a lot of problematic parts.
To start with the obvious: slavery
But in general, i think there’s a reason that not many nations have modeled their constitutions on ours.
2 Likes
If we don’t lie how can we keep people from knowing the truth?
2 Likes
What do you think they didn’t do a good job on with respect to slavery? Their choices were to either come to some sort of imperfect compromise where no one got everything they wanted, or have 13 de facto independent countries. We all know that slavery was the biggest elephant in the room the entire time.
Anyways, that subject is pretty off-topic from the setup of the judiciary branch.
They did the best they could at the time, but that doesn’t preclude making changes in the future, whether that involves slavery, the judiciary, or any other topic.
I think they were wrong to create a constitution that supported slavery. I think they were wrong to count some people as 3/5 of a person.
And if the divisions over slavery were so deep that that meant the 13 colonies couldn’t form a single nation, then they shouldn’t have done so.
Interesting discussion possibility, but it’s not at all related to the OP. Can you start a new thread if you want to go this route?
1 Like
Back on topic, I think it’ll be interesting to see what happens to the three other officers who are on trial in August. I have absolutely no idea how those are going to shake out.
ETA: I renamed the thread to make it more encompassing for those other three officers, now that the Chauvin case has been litigated.
There’s already an “alternate history” thread if you want to take it there.
2 Likes
Mods, can we please change the thread title?
George Floyd was murdered.
This isn’t a fact up for dispute.
I feel like the thread title is still trying to downplay the obvious cause of death. He didn’t just happen to die, like the MPD initially claimed.
Maybe:
“Trials related to the murder of George Floyd.”
“Trials for the police officers convicted and accused of murdering George Floyd.”
“Trials to prove water is wet.”
3 Likes
Done
1 Like
I guess while we’re at it, should I expand it even more? The next case after this one that I think is going to be interesting and have no idea it will play out is the one where the cop somehow pulled out her gun instead of her taser and killed that guy. Different incident, similar topic.
Kim Potter is charged with 2nd Degree Manslaughter.
The facts do not seem to be in dispute, but she will get her day in court to try to prove that her actions DID NOT “creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another.”
A lot of tax payer money soon to be wasted proving the obvious again.
In high school, they told me that in the US, the burden of proof is on the prosecution in criminal cases. I guess whoever told me that must have been wrong.
2 Likes
Sorry, I should have said that she will have to convince the Jury that the damning video that the state will present, clearly showing the textbook definition of 2nd Degree Manslaughter is not that. Unless the defense can get her own body camera footage and words removed from evidence, this will be rough for her.
But then again, you know exactly what I mean and are being needlessly pedantic for some reason.
This is also an amusing/disturbing outcome of the Chauvin conviction
Maryland Will Review In-Custody Death Cases Handled Under Dr. David Fowler : NPR?