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

To: Abundy
"and the dissent in the 9th circuit's en banc review of Locklear was dead on point"

The 9th Circuit Court refused the request for an en banc rehearing of Silveira v. Lockyer.

Anyways, the dissent to which you're referring would be the minority dissent. The losing dissent. The dissent-and-25-cents-will-get-you-a-cup-of-coffee dissent.

I read the dissent. I read the Sunday comics. They both have equal weight on the decision.

675 posted on 03/09/2007 7:08:29 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 648 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen

You do realize that such dissents are sometimes referred to by the SCOTUS in their opinions? (Mainly because of the justices' clerks who have done a lot of reading on these cases and will sometimes want to insert a clever comment or two.) Yes, even in a case where it was a dissent from a case that's not immediately before the Court (but the same issue). No, it's not often, and like the pure circuit counting it's not really that important in the overall scheme of things (because it's used to bolster an opinion a justice is writing vs. his vote at conference), but your sarcastic tone isn't warranted.

On an unrelated note, you might want to consider how you're debating people. Attacking people with sarcasm and name-calling isn't going to win over many people to your point of view. I know your POV is the minority on this site, but that makes it all the more important to remember what they say about honey and vinegar.


680 posted on 03/09/2007 7:31:15 PM PST by NinoFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 675 | View Replies ]

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