To: airedale
It's not a "slam dunk" but anyone reading it would have to come to the conclusion that the President is on solid legal ground.Correct me if I'm wrong, but the final arbiter of constitutionality is the Supreme Court, not the DOJ, right?
9 posted on
01/21/2006 9:58:00 PM PST by
mumps
To: mumps
Yes SCOTUS is the arbiter of constitutionality, but that doesn't mean that DOJ can't write a decent brief that makes strong constitutional arguments. I think they did just that and that anyone reading the arguments would have to come away with the conclusion that President Bush is on solid legal ground. That isn't a 100% guarantee he'd win if SCOTUS decided to hear the case but it is better than even money that he'd win.
10 posted on
01/21/2006 10:38:01 PM PST by
airedale
( XZ)
To: mumps
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the final arbiter of constitutionality is the Supreme Court, not the DOJ, right? Nope, you are wrong. The final arbiters are freepers. :-)
11 posted on
01/22/2006 10:35:43 AM PST by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson