| Author |
Message |
|
Justice
|
Post subject: Taylor vs Taylor  Posted: Fri 30 Dec 2005 08:36 |
|
|
|
|
Anyone familar with the Taylor vs Taylor Supreme court descion?
|
|
  |
|
|
|
 |
|
L.A.W.
|
Post subject: Posted: Fri 30 Dec 2005 16:08 |
|
 |
| in memoriam |
 |
Joined: Sat 07 Jun 2003 13:51
Posts: 705
Location: New England
|
|
Taylor v. Taintor is a 'ruling', not a 'law'.
_________________
Lance Allen Wilkinson
Recoveries by L.A.W.
Serving since 1984
“What is sought is found... what is overlooked escapes” (Oedipus Rex)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
thebishopp
|
Post subject: Posted: Fri 30 Dec 2005 21:59 |
|
Joined: Sun 12 Jun 2005 08:57
Posts: 566
Location: Evansville, Indiana
|
|
technically once the supreme court makes a "rulling of law" then from that moment forward that is how other cases of similiar nature should be interpreted and no government body is supposed to create or enforce laws contrary to their ruling.
If a government body wishes to have the interpretation redone then when a case arises they are supposed to appeal it on up the chain again.
However what usually happens is that a governing body merely creates a law without regard to the supreme court ruling and then forces the common citizen to appeal it.
Wouldn't be a problem except the common citizen usually doensn't have the money to take it on up the chain and therefore the governing body wins by default.
So much for the checks and balances system our forefathers had envisioned.
_________________
-The Solution-
Indiana Agency #: PI20700211
Indiana Notary Public - Exp: 12/20/13
"Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless and do no wrong. That is your oath."
- Kingdom of Heaven
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
