Posted on 02/11/2025 2:43:54 PM PST by Starman417
Just put the page back up, with the links leading to nowhere.
That's how you know they know what they're doing. The lawyers remaining mute is no accident. They've signed contracts with teeth in them I'll bet. Contracts developed by Trump's own legal staff so that the contracts weren't leaked.
Think about it.
I was seriously dejected as recently as the day before the election and even on election night I did not believe that the deep state would allow Trump to be President again. They successfully cheated once they took him to court and they tried to kill him. Yet here we are. Trump has way more power than ever and with nominal control of Congress he could eliminate the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court. Roberts will play ball.
I'm fine with that, too, but I think the SC might not want to have to have original jurisdiction over every crazy case the left wants to bring. Better to let the looney judge know that his ridiculous order will be at the Supremes in 24 hours getting shot down. That will prevent most of them from being decided, or maybe even brought in the first place.
Bttt.
5.56mm
“As long as Republicans remain a united front”
This.
If they hadn’t gone wobbly in ‘74, president Nixon could have finished his term.
At this point just start telling dems, when they get all stuffy, to go directly to ...
That’s the point. They would t hear it. They’d have their clerks dismiss it and that would be the end of it.
Mike Benz says 30% of the judges are Soros judges. That has to change.
I fear they might say, “that damn Trump, always causing issues” and then put it off for hearing a month later, or decide not to hear it at all, and sending it down to a district court, which would delay things by a long time. Better to weed them out with only the lunatic leftist judge rulings getting to the SC. Then that’s who they’ll be mad at.
Congress could remove any jurisdiction from any court other than the Supreme Court from hearing these suits against the executive branch. That way they could not punt it to a lower court.
I don’t know if the SC would like that. They don’t like to be told they have to take a case. There are cases where they have original jurisdiction (actions between states, for example) and they almost always let it be decided below before they agree to take it. They might resist having exclusive jurisdiction, and might even find it violates separation of powers, by forcing them to do something whether they want to or not. I’d try to avoid that. We want to keep the SC on our side.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make
Not quite accurate. The SCOTUS refers original jurisdiction cases to a referee (usually a federal district court judge) to hear and report. The SCOTUS then reviews de novo to affirm, decide, or remand.
Nixon did nothing wrong.
“Watergate” is a Rosetta stone connecting Dallas to Crossfire Hurricane, if only people could see it.
You have just summarized that part of the Constitution, which I already referred to. But you did not address my point.
The SC has a great deal of discretion in how it administers the federal court system, and is very protective of its position, with respect to interference from the political branches.
other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party
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.