[Sabertooth]

The SCOTUS will deny hearing it I'll bet.

To soon to tell. We haven't seen the rulng.

Flagging a few of FR's lawyers for a heads up.

[Avoiding_Sulla]

Curb--Our--Courts!

Curb--Our--Courts!

Curb--Our--Courts!

Curb--Our--Courts!

Congress has the power to end these outrages.

Congress will not get cooking until they feel the heat -- and that heat must come from us!

[AntiGuv]

In my honest opinion, I think the 9th Circuit ruling is consistent with Bush v Gore and should be upheld if the SCOTUS applies that same rationale. Moreover, I think that the SCOTUS will simply affirm in any case just because they won't want to revisit the issues of Bush v Gore [which they'll have to, in order to overturn].

That being said, the guidance of Bush v Gore that you cannot have voters subjected to differing standards has been unevenly applied by lower courts, to say the very least. Furthermore, many states still have disparate voting systems statewide, and so that's an additional caveat.

It's really up in the air what the SCOTUS might do. It's conceivable that the SCOTUS will take the case and extend the stay indefinitely, even if it rules after Oct 7 [thus allowing this recall to proceed]. It's also conceivable that the Supreme Court will not extend the stay, even if they do take up the case [thus postponing the recall to March].

If I had to guess, they will decline review, but that's a very low confidence conjecture. The case law pursuant Bush v Gore is simply to novel and undeveloped to guess with any great deal of certainty..

[Torie]

SCOTUS won't touch it. It is not important enough for them. It is just a state election, and the impact is a one time event. The decision is outrageous however. Suddenly, a vote system that has been around since rocks cooled, now has to be dumped ahead of schedule, because a few dumbass voters just can't hack it. It is an impertinance and an outrage, but then that's our 9th circuit, God bless em.