Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

9th Circuit will be voting on whether to reconsider the 3-judge panel decision en banc.
Chris Geidner Twitter ^ | February 10, 2017 | Chris Gender

Posted on 02/12/2017 5:52:47 AM PST by saywhatagain

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last
To: Jim Noble

Exactly! Our sovereignty is the issue on every front at this time. We stand in the way of central government...unelected...for the world in the form of the U.N. or some such corrupt group.
The US Constitution MUST be protected on every front against all attempts to dissolve it. All the flak about global warming is the same thing. Gang Up Time against the U.S. A. with multinational trade “Treaties” and International Groupies with Marxist Beliefs who MUST destroy American Sovereignty if they are to prevail.
We are in THE WAR for our future.


41 posted on 02/12/2017 6:40:33 AM PST by Mollypitcher1 (I have not yet begun to fight....John Paul Jones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

That or something from one of the other branches scared them.


42 posted on 02/12/2017 6:42:18 AM PST by cableguymn (We need a redneck in the white house....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bulldaddy
I forgot one other important point: if the request for an en banc review is denied, it will give the requesting judge or judges who weren't on the 3-judge panel of idiots to write a dissent from the denial, explaining why the request was made and why the panel decision needs full (or enhanced) court review. Those dissents will be very illuminating. It will give the "real" judges the chance to identify themselves and distance from this decision.

I don't know how many judges have to vote in favor of the request for en banc review. It's a matter of internal Ninth Circuit Rules of Procedure. I'm too lazy to look those rules up, but I'm sure they are available online. Usually 50% (not necessarily a majority, but at least 50%) must vote for en banc review. That vote will occur after the briefs are submitted on Thursday.

43 posted on 02/12/2017 6:44:11 AM PST by Bulldaddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: saywhatagain

“Once again, Trump has stumbled into an important jurisprudential point.”

Sounds like a jackass leftist who can’t concede a single point to Trump without insulting him in the same breath.


44 posted on 02/12/2017 6:46:05 AM PST by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Bulldaddy
Thank you for sharing. Helps for a better understanding

It appears the consensus regarding the argument made on behalf of President Trump was incomplete and weak. If true, I was curious why attorney preparation was so poor. Silly mistakes like that can not be made.

45 posted on 02/12/2017 6:49:31 AM PST by saywhatagain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: knarf

>
I think that was the real threat that prompted this action.

Impeachment was real and almost a guaranteed done deal.
>

And by what metric would you base THAT upon?

Has Congress gotten off its collective asses to *anything* against the rampant over-reach (aside from the few for bribery\like...low-hanging-fruit)?

>
They’d better do something about their activism.
>

Day late, $ short as they say re: their reputation. Still, see above.


46 posted on 02/12/2017 6:51:42 AM PST by i_robot73 ("A man chooses. A slave obeys." - Andrew Ryan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RideForever

Even without this list, the court overstepped its authority. The Judicial Branch which the court represents cannot intrude on the President’s rights as clearly defined in the Constitution and affirmed by the Legislative Branch.
It was an attempt to override the Constitution! It must not be allowed to stand as precident or our Constitution is worthless. That was their intent and corrupt purpose. They must be impeached and disbarred.


47 posted on 02/12/2017 6:58:03 AM PST by Mollypitcher1 (I have not yet begun to fight....John Paul Jones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: saywhatagain

9th worried that there may be a huge push to disband them.....


48 posted on 02/12/2017 7:02:25 AM PST by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

.....or....the entire 9th circuit is saying “hey, we want to say F’ Trump also.”


49 posted on 02/12/2017 7:04:02 AM PST by TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig (Repeal & replace Obamacare, tax reform, fix infrastructure, fixin military, Israel, kill enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle
Agreed. He can play this game all day long if they want to.

They thought they were dealing with a traditional republican. They soon discovered they were NOT!

I would withdraw the current EO and reissue another which would void this whole CYA attempt. Let them sit there and boil in their own juices. Rinse and repeat until these freaks get the message. We know our republican con-gress are nothing more than pillow biters. Remove them from the game, they are less than useless.

50 posted on 02/12/2017 7:05:08 AM PST by BlackbirdSST (Trust not one word from the enemedia, until it can be independently verified!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

Is this like SCOTUS...where a judge typically won’t grab a case unless he/she thinks they have the votes?


51 posted on 02/12/2017 7:06:35 AM PST by TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig (Repeal & replace Obamacare, tax reform, fix infrastructure, fixin military, Israel, kill enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying he should do, and I expect we’ll hear just that in a few days.

They have seriously misunderestimated him.


52 posted on 02/12/2017 7:11:40 AM PST by Not A Snowbird (SandyInPeoria just doesn't sound right... yet here I am.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Bulldaddy

It’s posts like yours that keep me glued to FR.


53 posted on 02/12/2017 7:13:00 AM PST by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: txrefugee

Get rid of them they are obstructionists


54 posted on 02/12/2017 7:28:26 AM PST by ronnie raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Principled

“My guess is the sedition route.”

That’s my take on what they are trying to do. They are simply going to double down on stupid.


55 posted on 02/12/2017 7:38:28 AM PST by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle

They are pretty used to being overturned.


56 posted on 02/12/2017 7:41:13 AM PST by epluribus_2 (he had the best mom - ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bulldaddy

Thanks for all the info!


57 posted on 02/12/2017 7:43:49 AM PST by goodnesswins (Say hello to President Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

.
The solution is dilution.

Split the Ninth.


58 posted on 02/12/2017 7:45:17 AM PST by ptsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: saywhatagain

I believe this action is basis what Trump is about to do, not that they consider their 3 judge decision wrong. I am sure they are aware how poorly written the decision was. But remember, if Obamacare can be turned into a tax then anything can be written in attempting to thwart Trump... anything.


59 posted on 02/12/2017 7:49:35 AM PST by Lagmeister ( false prophets shall rise, and shall show signs and wonders Mark 13:22)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saywhatagain

The practice of “judge shopping” should be stopped, it certainly doesn’t help the rule of law.


60 posted on 02/12/2017 7:57:33 AM PST by kenmcg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson