• Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Today, 08:53 AM
    There is no First Amendment right to defame.
    19 replies | 543 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Today, 08:48 AM
    The fact that they can be prosecuted for violating our laws makes it obvious that they are subject to our jurisdiction. They don't need to consent to be subjected. Or do you think that an illegal immigrant who commits a crime has a perfectly good defense: "Hey, I am an invader, so you have no jurisdiction to try me." Get real.
    97 replies | 1938 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Today, 08:41 AM
    Of course they were. Article III of the Constitution delegated the "judicial power of the United States" to the federal courts. It's obvious that "judicial power" includes the power to determine the law that applies to a particular case. If a party claims that a law (statute, regulation, ordinance, common law rule, or any other type of law) violates the Constitution, a court must decide whether it does. The Court just overturned a ban on bump stocks. I guess they didn't get the memo that they were supposed to rubber stamp it. You apparently don't realize that the power to impose a federal income tax (along with other kinds of taxes) comes from Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution. It was put there deliberately because the requisition method under the Articles of Confederation was a failure (see Federalist 15). The only reason for the 16th was to overturn an 1895 SCOTUS decision that held that a tax on investment income (but not other kinds of income) was a direct tax that had to be apportioned.
    30 replies | 731 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:59 AM
    The only kind of income tax that was unconstitutional before the 16th was a tax on investment income. The Court went out of its way in the Pollock decision to reaffirm that a tax on other kinds of income such as pay-for-work was valid: Later, the Court explained why the entire act had to be held void: Here's a link to the case upholding the Civil War era income tax against the claim that it was an unapportioned direct tax: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/102/586/
    30 replies | 731 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:18 AM
    Wrong. The only time a federal income tax was ever held unconstitutional was the tax on investment income addressed in the 1895 Pollock decision. This result was overturned by the 16th Amendment. A tax on personal compensation had previously been upheld by a unanimous Supreme Court in 1881, based on the general taxing power granted to Congress in I.8.1 of the Constitution.
    30 replies | 731 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:54 AM
    Whose definition? Yours? LOL! There's certainly no such legal definition, and that's what counts. In any event, the 14th Amendment makes no exception for invaders, so your argument is still a loser.
    97 replies | 1938 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-13-2024, 10:10 AM
    I agree with you. They seem to think that using such rhetoric helps to shoehorn an exception into the 14th Amendment that isn't there.
    97 replies | 1938 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-13-2024, 09:59 AM
    It sure is. Most if not all states protect a person's right of publicity to prevent the commercial use of his likeness without permission. Some states even extend this protection to the estate of a deceased person (e.g. Elvis). Speaking of Elvis, Tennessee recently enacted the Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security (ELVIS) Act, to go into effect July 1. The goal of the act is to protect songwriters, performers, and music industry professionals' voices from unauthorized cloning with AI technology. Previously, Tennessee law did not explicitly include voice as a protected right, along with name, photograph, and likeness. Further, the law only protected such rights from unauthorized use in advertising. This new legislation amends the state's Personal Rights Protection Act of 1984 to add ďvoiceĒ as a protected personal right and expands protection of such personal rights against all unauthorized uses.
    14 replies | 363 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-13-2024, 09:40 AM
    But Trump has said on many occasions (I posted some of them) that Article II allows him to do anything. He's not lying, is he? I'd be shocked, shocked to think that he wasn't telling the truth. SCOTUS disagrees with you, and its rulings, and not your uninformed opinions, are the law. BTW. Trump's proposal would apply to the child of any illegal alien whether part of an invasion or not.
    97 replies | 1938 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-12-2024, 07:07 AM
    Following up on Trump's narcissistic belief that as President he can do anything he wants, today's Wall Street Journal has a column written by William A. Galston that outlines some of Trump's proposed expansions of executive power in the even he's reelected. Among other things, he wants to issue an executive order to end birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants. While this may be a laudable goal, it is at odds with the plain language of the 14th Amendment and with Supreme Court precedent. The column concludes: https://ereader.wsj.net?selDate=20240612&goTo=A015&artid=1&editionStart=The%20Wall Street Journal
    97 replies | 1938 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-10-2024, 01:21 PM
    He couldn't. He just thinks he can because Article II of the Constitution somehow gives him the authority to do anything he wants, something that never occurred to every other president in the country's history.
    97 replies | 1938 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    06-05-2024, 03:15 PM
    She's the GOP's version of Maxine Waters.
    29 replies | 1788 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    05-22-2024, 07:36 PM
    And I see you have yet to respond to the fact that Walter Nixon was first convicted and later impeached,
    22 replies | 773 view(s)
  • Sonny Tufts's Avatar
    05-20-2024, 07:46 PM
    I would point out that federal judge Walter Nixon was convicted of perjury, and this conviction was.the basis for his subsequent removal from office by the Senate via impeachment.
    22 replies | 773 view(s)
No More Results
About Sonny Tufts

Basic Information

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
1

Signature


We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
Erwin N. Griswold

Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
Anonymous

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
2,795
Posts Per Day
0.63
General Information
Last Activity
Today 08:53 AM
Join Date
04-25-2012
Referrals
0

04-16-2024


04-15-2024


06-11-2023


04-26-2023


09-14-2022


08-28-2022


08-22-2022


08-15-2022


08-07-2022


01-26-2021


04-06-2018


03-17-2018


03-08-2018


08-03-2017

  • 10:57 AM - Hidden

12-15-2016


No results to display...
Page 1 of 95 1231151 ... LastLast

06-15-2024


06-14-2024


06-13-2024


06-12-2024


06-05-2024


05-23-2024


04-29-2024


04-26-2024


04-20-2024


04-16-2024


04-15-2024



Page 1 of 95 1231151 ... LastLast