MERGED: All About Gloria Arroyo - Past, Present, Future

[AlbertCruz]

teleserye logic? really. i knew i was going to have fun with you.

yeah sure, they could've gotten away considering their resources. but they don't want to just get away. they want to get away with their resources intact. they can't do that by going to exile.

what else you got?

wow, watching too much tv? i love all your baseless conspiracy theories

[slyder10]

how long did it take to prosecute erap? 2 years? less? powerful? YES! rich? VERY RICH! influential? SUPER DUPER! how come? )

[tylerdurden]

so if was some one person rather then Arroyo, can you still say the same about the situation?

man, he just mentioned DOST scholars, etc. are you even reading these posts?

[monroy]

Can the Supreme Court Change Its Mind? - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com

I Think Bro kanang issue is one good example of the Cityhood reversal from unconstitutional to constitutional .. mao na gi issue sa Pnoy Admin as bad precedent .. but the IBP support the reversal of the SC ug katong mga Legal Expert ....

No bro, frankly that's wrong. What that article is stating is altering established jurisprudence, that means they are going against precedent and forming new reasons for a new ruling in a more recent case. This isn't an example of taking a previous case that has already been ruled with finality, and then issuing another ruling on that exact same case which would mean the "final" ruling was not really final.

As you can see those are two different cases. Lawrence v. Texas is the recent case, Bowers v. Hardwick is the old case which created the precedent and jurisprudence. The US SC is not reversing its decision in the Bowers v Hardwick case, it still stands. All they are doing is ignoring it as a precedent in the latest case, which is allowed under common law system. What isn't allowed is taking a ruling that has already been made final and executory, then changing the decision after the fact.

Even having said that, if dealing strictly with flipping jurisprudence, high court rarely do this in other countries because to do so will create chaos in the justice system, so people can't rely on past decisions to guide their actions. That's why US SC rarely flips jurisprudence, it maybe happens once a decade at most. In the Philippines it happens way too many times, sometimes every year if we're lucky and that's no good for justice...

[tylerdurden]

wow, watching too much tv? i love all your baseless conspiracy theories

that's called logic. i know it's not a requirement for your work but you should really look into it.

[tylerdurden]

how long did it take to prosecute erap? 2 years? less? powerful? YES! rich? VERY RICH! influential? SUPER DUPER! how come? )

are you kidding? erap is way below the arroyo's league, it's not even funny.

[monroy]

so if was some one person rather then Arroyo, can you still say the same about the situation?

I would, because I subscribe to the established view that Constitutional provisions are subject to limitations.

[slyder10]

you don't think the SC will be biased enough? good luck with that!

nah! that's why it is THE SUPREME COURT. if it can be biased the first time. then all their decisions will definitely be questionable. would you let someone borrow your car if you know he's a car thief? presuming that they're biased indeed. what's the use of having laws then!

[eslowrak]

sus na unsa,para ma atiman na ang kahimtang sa panglawas ni GMA, pro maski pa ug guilty na sila kung wala pay kaso naka file pwde d i nimo na sila babagan? now ang pangutana? sa kadugay na nila sa pwesto ngano hantud karon wala man gihapon sila naka file sa case? unsa man ang nadugayan? remeber ka during elelction? unsa g sulti ni noynoy?

wa silay lig-on ibedensya sa ilang akosasyon ni Gloria

[mr.twin]

what if CGMA win the case against him?..kinsa naman pod ang ato e blame?