Presidents do not have the write to rewrite the law

The 9th Circuit Court of appeals ruled that the Navy can't break the law even if the President says they can.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff
Loading thread data ...

Keep in mind that science is science, and neither the president nor a judge has the right to shit on conclusive research.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

The constitution give everyone the right to appeal to a higher court, even the president.

Reply to
Mark A

He's got a valid point, Joe. The 9th has been spanked again and again due to their activist nonsense.

Reply to
witfal

This thing with whales and radar appears to not be activist nonsense. But, keep in mind that I do not subscribe to the bullshit about our being put here to lord over all the other living things on the planet. So, I tend to err on the side of caution when it comes to things that might harm other animals. That's the only smart way to be.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

Not in and of itself. The jury's still out on that one. But the 9th has very often stepped on its own appendage by overstepping what's judicially permissable.

Bottom line: I suspect this is just junk science being used by extremist anti-military types. We'll see.

Reply to
witfal

I'm not anti-military, but I think the Navy's being a bit anal about objecting to a few simple measures to be more careful. We've got no business messing with whales if there are alternatives, and obviously, there ARE alternatives.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

I'm not saying you are. But we have more than a few fringe groups here that will try to handicap the military any way they can.

I've also not noticed any other country in the world with the same concerns. Much like Mexico wants to protect their southern borders against illegal immigation, they don't want us to do the same thing.

The U.S. is always expected to play by the rules while others are allowed to do what they wish.

Reply to
witfal

I thought the Mexican navy was a raft.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

I see Iraq was allowed to do what they wanted. And, of course, the US has never interfered with the internal affairs of other countries.

The funny thing here, we are not talking about international rules that were being broken, but US laws.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

Anyone from Mexico wearing a uniform of any kind, be it army, navy, or a cop, looks ridiculous.

They're all Keystone Kops.

Reply to
witfal

U.S. laws apply on the open seas?

Reply to
witfal

Who *is* their tailor,anyway? Now, Puerto Rico - cops look sharp there, and that's tough to do in a place where it's like 90 degrees all day long.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

U.S. laws apply EVERYWHERE. You should know that by now.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

Look at the "parent" country.

All I see when I look at a Mexican national in any uniform is the personification of corruption and ineptness.

Reply to
witfal

US laws apply to US-registered vessels, especially when they are part of the US Navy.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

The science is not behind it is not the question. The questions are, "Can the President write an executive order that overrides a federal law?" and "Can the Navy or the military ignore laws in the name of national defense?"

The National Research Defense Council, the International Fund for Animal Welfar, Cetacian Society, International, League for Coast Protection, Ocean Futures Society and Jean-Michelle Cousteau (I think a family member of Jacques Cousteau) are the plaintiffs-appellees and the California Coastal Commission is the intervenor-appellee. While none of them are in favor of the military, I don't beleive that they are anti-military either.

I read about the problem with the whales and lawsuit in _Science_ magazine. I believe that the scientific evidence that the whales are harmed by the whales is very good, based on these and other readings.

You can find a google search and find the 9th circuir court and find the actual opinion (the case is something like NRDC vs. Winter) easily.

You can also find the ruling for the central district of CA on the internet.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

I don't think you can even say "While none of them are in favor of the military." Can you imagine an interviewer asking NRDC's president if she's in favor of the military? It would be as absurd as being brought into an emergency room after a car accident and asking the attending doctor the same question.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

By that, I meant that they are not primarily anti-military groups. They're all pro-environment groups. I don't think being pro- or anti-military is really on any of their RADAR screens.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

I wish the Navy would use their sonar equipment on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and see if they can find anything inside the head of those judges.

Reply to
badgolferman

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.