1 posted on
05/31/2005 4:15:32 PM PDT by
CHARLITE
To: ThreePuttinDude; Beth528; SMARTY; Ghost of Philip Marlowe; CyberAnt; AmericanArchConservative; ...
2 posted on
05/31/2005 4:17:31 PM PDT by
CHARLITE
(Why do we permit seditious, hateful messages to be shouted from muslim pulpits in America?)
To: CHARLITE
Has this not been standard practice for many years?
The Justices are more like the Editor of newspaper, in that his name is on it, but others do the leg work. They serve to guide, not sit at a computer and type.
3 posted on
05/31/2005 4:18:54 PM PDT by
Michael.SF.
('Well, a Democratic socialist ...is basically a liberal Democrat' - Howard Dean - DNC Chairman)
To: CHARLITE
"Congress should put aside partisan warfare over the federal judiciary long enough to enact a reform a limit of one law clerk per justice" Fat chance.
4 posted on
05/31/2005 4:21:26 PM PDT by
Enterprise
(Coming soon from Newsweek: "Fallujah - we had to destroy it in order to save it.")
To: CHARLITE
Having the clerks do research and a first draft is routine. But it looks like Harry relied on them more than he should have. Just confirms what I've thought for a long time - Harry wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. He just repeated stuff he knew would get him in with the law professoriate and MSM.
8 posted on
05/31/2005 4:25:56 PM PDT by
colorado tanker
(The People Have Spoken)
To: CHARLITE
"One last example: the important 1985 federalism case of Garcia vs. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority. According to Greenhouse, after the justices had privately voted, 5 to 4, and after Blackmun had already been assigned to write the majority opinion, one of his clerks informed him that he the clerk disagreed, and would rather draft an opinion switching Blackmun to the side of the four dissenters. Blackmun acquiesced, the minority became a majority, and constitutional law made a major, unexpected turn."
Wait, so you mean to tell me that judges on the Supreme Court can change their minds after talking with other people? Oh my, how is such a travesty legal?! [/sarcasm]
10 posted on
05/31/2005 4:28:39 PM PDT by
NJ_gent
(Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.)
To: CHARLITE
I suspect a lot of Americans would be shocked at just how mediocre many U.S. Supreme Court justices are. Almost as mediocre as U.S. Senators, for the most part.
11 posted on
05/31/2005 4:29:41 PM PDT by
Alberta's Child
(I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but lord I'm free.)
To: CHARLITE
I guess it comes down to a question of who you would prefer writing laws, 80+ year old judges who have been appointed for life or 25 year old clerks fresh out of law school.
Personally, I would prefer to leave writing laws to elected legislatures.
13 posted on
05/31/2005 4:33:45 PM PDT by
kennedy
("Why would I listen to losers?")
To: CHARLITE
Compare the syllabus of U.S. v. Miller with the text of the actual decision and the power of the clerks becomes apparent, especially when at least one other court IIRC seems to have cited the syllabus to U.S. v. Miller in making its decision.
17 posted on
05/31/2005 4:42:47 PM PDT by
supercat
(Sorry--this tag line is out of order.)
To: CHARLITE
18 posted on
05/31/2005 4:42:47 PM PDT by
bubman
To: CHARLITE
This article's revelations concern me greatly, but do not surprise me in the least. When you read the early decisions of the Supreme Court, you are reading the words as written by the Justices themselves.
Justices, like Congressman and Senators, become products of their staffs in direct proportion to how much staff they have. The staffs put out their laws, their letters, their decisions, their press releases, their speeches. In the end, the Justice, Member of Congress, whatever, need only be sufficiently sober to cast a vote. All else can be done by others.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column: "The Gunfight at Not-OK Corral"
22 posted on
05/31/2005 4:53:53 PM PDT by
Congressman Billybob
(For copies of my speech, "Dealing with Outlaw Judges," please Freepmail me.)
To: CHARLITE
Was it Justice Powell who said that he personally wrote every decision that bore his name? I believe he also did the greater amount of the research that went into his writings.
Plese correct me if I have identified the wrong Justice.
25 posted on
05/31/2005 5:23:32 PM PDT by
em2vn
To: CHARLITE
Eye Opener......
In what regard?
27 posted on
05/31/2005 5:36:02 PM PDT by
deport
(Women always get the last say in an argument.. anything after that is the start of a new argument)
To: CHARLITE
More lies from the Times.
Does anyone beleive the BS they print?
28 posted on
05/31/2005 5:45:27 PM PDT by
Doe Eyes
To: CHARLITE
I imagine that age has a lot to do with how much work a judge delegates. Being a Justice is hard and stressful mental work, more than an ill octogenarian can handle. If a Justice is letting his clerks decide his cases, he needs to retire.
32 posted on
05/31/2005 7:05:08 PM PDT by
Huntress
(Possession really is nine tenths of the law.)
To: CHARLITE
35 posted on
06/01/2005 4:13:36 AM PDT by
Sandy
To: CHARLITE
"Last week, following his disappointment over the Easter Bunny, Pulitzer Prize-winner David J. Garrow was devastated after he learned that there's no Santa Claus."
37 posted on
06/01/2005 4:24:38 AM PDT by
dread78645
(Sorry Mr. Franklin, We couldn't keep it.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson