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

Skip to comments.

House Votes to Break Up 9th Circuit Court [me-elect enough senators for this]
NewsMax.com ^ | Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2004 | NewsMax.com Wires

Posted on 10/06/2004 9:15:14 AM PDT by Ruth C

WASHINGTON – The Republican-led House voted Tuesday to break up the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, an action opponents said was motivated by conservatives' ire over some of the court's rulings.

Nine states are covered by the 9th Circuit, but the legislation would leave just California and Hawaii in a revamped lineup.

The proposal splits the seven other states into two new courts: one to handle appeals from Arizona, Idaho, Montana and Nevada; and the other to oversee Alaska, Oregon and Washington. Supporters said the new lineup reflects the need to address the region's bulging caseload and rapid population growth.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 9thcircuit; appealcourts; courts; districtcourts; liberalcourts
Time to elect enough Republican Senators to get this done. It is in the courts that our culture is under attack. This court has been overturned more than any other appeals court.

This election is not only about the war on terror which is the most important issue for physical safety and continued existence, it is also about the continued existence of our culture. It is the COURTS and in particular this court which has been legislating from the bench, which have usurped the power clearly given to the legislature in the constitution. Established to be the watchdog over the power asserted by the legislature the court has itself become a purveyor of attacks on the Constitution.

1 posted on 10/06/2004 9:15:15 AM PDT by Ruth C
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ruth C

FAT CHANCE, IMHO


2 posted on 10/06/2004 9:17:31 AM PDT by Mister Baredog ((Part of the Reagan legacy is to re-elect G.W. Bush))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mister Baredog

Well, hopefully your feeling of 'fat chance' doesn't stop you from doing all you can to get Republican senators elected. If we don't fight for it, true, 'fat chance' will be the result.


3 posted on 10/06/2004 9:24:39 AM PDT by Ruth C (learn to analyze rationally and extrapolate consequences..they don't teach that in school now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ruth C

All those reds states and so many blue senators...


4 posted on 10/06/2004 9:27:35 AM PDT by Sybeck1 (Kerry: how can we trust him with our money, if Teresa won't trust him with hers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruth C
Time to elect enough Republican Senators to get this done.

Enough? we not we told that with a majority in all phases we would get a conservative agenda? Now the benchmark has changed & it will (guaranteed) change when we think it's confirmed. The pols aren't going to allow a conservative agenda to flourish - no way no how. The elites that really run this country wll not allow it to happen in this totally controlled "Two-Party Cartel". They will play musical chairs with the senators on every important issue with just ONE vote short & we will vote these fools back in again & again.

5 posted on 10/06/2004 9:27:56 AM PDT by Digger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruth C

Ruth C,
It's about time they break up the wacky 9th circuit. The increase in the areas population is rational reason to break it up...but you know the libs will fight it tooth and nail


6 posted on 10/06/2004 9:30:18 AM PDT by brooklyn dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruth C
Well, hopefully your feeling of 'fat chance' doesn't stop you from doing all you can to get Republican senators elected. If we don't fight for it, true, 'fat chance' will be the result.

Perhaps I'm a little doubtful that we could get to 60 reliable votes in the Senate.

Where I live we're about to re-elect do-nothing B. Boxer to a third term, ugh.

You can be sure I'll be voting for her opponent.

Living under the tyranny of the 9th Circuit is really no fun, nothing would be better than breaking up their twisted form of "justice".

7 posted on 10/06/2004 9:58:55 AM PDT by Mister Baredog ((Part of the Reagan legacy is to re-elect G.W. Bush))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ruth C

Aye, that 60-vote majority. There's the rub. I have a question: Is this 60-vote majority part of the Constitution or the US Code, or is it one of the rules of the Senate? If the latter, why doesn't the Senate just change the rules? Does that also require a 60 vote majority? Guess that was more than one question.


8 posted on 10/06/2004 10:06:19 AM PDT by Cooltouch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ruth C
The proposal splits the seven other states into two new courts: one to handle appeals from Arizona, Idaho, Montana and Nevada; and the other to oversee Alaska, Oregon and Washington. Supporters said the new lineup reflects the need to address the region's bulging caseload and rapid population growth.

Wouldn't solve much, IMHO...

The court for AK, OR, and WA would be located either in Portland or Seattle, which are no better than SF.

And where would be located the court for AZ, ID, MT and NV??? Flying from Helena to either Phoenix or Las Vegas ain't cheap. I'd break it like this:

AK, ID, MT, OR and WA could be the 12th Circuit, located in either Spokane or Boise.

AZ and NV could be the 13th, located in Phoenix.

9 posted on 10/06/2004 11:57:30 AM PDT by El Conservador ("No blood for oil!"... Then don't drive, you moron!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: El Conservador
Actually, the 60 votes is a senate rule to call for cloture, cloture would end debate and bring a bill up for the vote. There are some ways around it, one noted here. http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/905898/posts However, that probably has huge political consequences. I wonder if any citizens' group could file suit on grounds of non-constitutionality, maybe something about not getting justice since there are so many justices not appointed, and if they could, would the supreme court even hear it?
10 posted on 10/06/2004 4:24:34 PM PDT by Ruth C (learn to analyze rationally and extrapolate consequences..they don't teach that in school now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cooltouch

"Is this 60-vote majority part of the Constitution or the US Code, or is it one of the rules of the Senate? If the latter, why doesn't the Senate just change the rules?"

It's a rule of the senate. It isn't changed because when we are in a minority by one vote we know we can prevent bad legislation.

The super-majority rule keeps bad laws as well as good laws from being passed. Both sides want it this way.


11 posted on 10/06/2004 4:37:24 PM PDT by edwin hubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ruth C

...The Republican-led House voted Tuesday to break up the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, an action opponents said was motivated by conservatives' ire over some of the court's rulings. ...


===
isn't this the function of legislature (which is elected) - to correct the judiciary if need be??


12 posted on 10/06/2004 4:39:59 PM PDT by Chilldoubt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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