Skip to comments.
House votes to break up San Francisco based-9th Circuit appeals court
AP ^
| 10/5/4
| MARK SHERMAN
Posted on 10/05/2004 12:56:59 PM PDT by SmithL
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-133 next last
To: SmithL
Great news! Hope it happens.
41
posted on
10/05/2004 1:05:49 PM PDT
by
appalachian_dweller
(Threat Level: HIGH -- For a basic list of survival gear go to my FR Homepage.)
To: Bigh4u2
Yes, but post#37 is my concern.
42
posted on
10/05/2004 1:06:01 PM PDT
by
TXBubba
( Democrats: If they don't abort you then they will tax you to death.)
To: SmithL
How long until the the 9th circuit declares this unconstitutional?
43
posted on
10/05/2004 1:06:18 PM PDT
by
glorgau
To: TexasCajun
"How many times have the US Supreme Court had to over-turn a decision from this liberal court?"
The 9th isn't really that much more liberal than any other. The problem with the 9th has always been that it's so large that it's quite easy to get a few loonies together for a ridiculous decision. Of course, you don't hear much about the day-to-day decisions that make perfect sense. You only hear about the ones so absurd that they can sell papers.
44
posted on
10/05/2004 1:07:07 PM PDT
by
NJ_gent
(Conservatism begins at home. Security begins at the border. Please, someone, secure our borders.)
To: snarkytart
Do you think Kerry and Edwards are going to show up for the vote? This doesn't even affect their states, so I find it hard to believe they would come off the campaign trail to kill it, without pissing off all those other states in the process.
45
posted on
10/05/2004 1:07:11 PM PDT
by
mabelkitty
(Do not indulge the Negative Nervous Nellies with reassurances.)
To: SCALEMAN
LOL. One Bench-busting nuke would suffice.
46
posted on
10/05/2004 1:07:49 PM PDT
by
Shqipo
(The gloves are on and the corners are empty.)
To: snarkytart
We'll see.
McCain would have a very difficult time defending the status quo on this one.
47
posted on
10/05/2004 1:07:52 PM PDT
by
mabelkitty
(Do not indulge the Negative Nervous Nellies with reassurances.)
To: macbee
OK, now how do us folks in CA get out from under? 8-} The judges will have to be split up. Maybe we can leave the most conservative ones in the new 9th Circuit?
48
posted on
10/05/2004 1:07:55 PM PDT
by
jackbill
To: wideawake
Senator Sphincter of Penn and that stupid clown Hatch will show their true colors. Watch.
49
posted on
10/05/2004 1:08:03 PM PDT
by
samadams2000
("Did they get you to trade, your heroes for ghosts")
To: TXBubba
If enough Senators can be swayed, and I know it's not easy, this could become law.
Maybe not until after the election tho.
Consider what you are reading before you become dishearted!
MSM!
The AP is not the most 'trusted name' in journalism!
50
posted on
10/05/2004 1:08:21 PM PDT
by
Bigh4u2
To: SmithL
51
posted on
10/05/2004 1:08:51 PM PDT
by
onyx
(Please don't be a FReeloader. Be a FReepin monthly donor!)
To: TXBubba
I didn't even know this could be done.The entire Federal Court structure is controlled by Law. Congress can and has changed the number of SCOTUS justices, for example.
The tough part here is getting this through the Senate. My guess is this will be filibustered by the 'Rats in the Senate.
52
posted on
10/05/2004 1:08:51 PM PDT
by
You Dirty Rats
(WE WILL WIN WITH W - Isara)
To: Syncro
Fear not.
The 9th Circuit will lose the power and control they enjoy and you'll see massive retirements.
53
posted on
10/05/2004 1:09:28 PM PDT
by
mabelkitty
(Do not indulge the Negative Nervous Nellies with reassurances.)
To: TXBubba
Sure it can Article III, Section 1 clearly says Congress has the power to do this or even get rid of it entirely.
54
posted on
10/05/2004 1:09:31 PM PDT
by
justshutupandtakeit
(My father is 10X the hero John Fraud Kerry is.)
To: TheBigB
Horse crap. If the Senate doesn't follow through it will be because of a filabuster not Hatch.
55
posted on
10/05/2004 1:10:43 PM PDT
by
justshutupandtakeit
(My father is 10X the hero John Fraud Kerry is.)
To: SmithL
as a Californian, I say ABOUT TIME!!!!!!!!!!
56
posted on
10/05/2004 1:11:07 PM PDT
by
pollywog
(Psalm 121;1 I Lift my eyes to the hills from whence cometh my help.)
To: SmithL
Hold on a minute...Did the legislation call for the removal of the bum judges?
If not then this legislation only spreads the manure in many direction rather than cleaning it up all together.
But I am not a lawyer or an expert on these things, so I might be wrong...
57
posted on
10/05/2004 1:11:11 PM PDT
by
DSBull
(Truth is the light of the World, shine it everywhere)
To: SmithL
It'll die this year in the Senate. I would love nothing better though than to see the Nine Circus Clowns wings clipped for good.
58
posted on
10/05/2004 1:12:23 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: DSBull
Yes, you are incorrect.
They will have to appoint 58 judges.
I'd like to see them try and fillibuster 58 justices in this instance.
This is amazing strategery.
59
posted on
10/05/2004 1:12:48 PM PDT
by
mabelkitty
(Do not indulge the Negative Nervous Nellies with reassurances.)
To: SmithL
That makes total sense. The 9th Circuit was too large as compared to the other Circuits in the country and was just getting bigger as the population growth shifted Westward.
This will streamline things a bit and create at least one reasonably conservative district.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-133 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson