[dotnetfellow]

> He had to. It was his decision they were ruling on.

So? Why couldn't he rule on his own decision? He's the Chief Justice for petes sake.

I see the dim rat libs have managed to put one over on the pubbies once again visa vie the courts.

[JFC]

Congress!!!

[IMRight]

> He had to. It was his decision they were ruling on.

So? Why couldn't he rule on his own decision? He's the Chief Justice for petes sake.

Judicial ethics forbid it. It's a clear conflict of interest.

[Saint Reagan]

So? Why couldn't he rule on his own decision? He's the Chief Justice for petes sake.

I see the dim rat libs have managed to put one over on the pubbies once again visa vie the courts.

It wouldn't have made a difference. Is 5-3 any worse than 5-4? You still lose.