EX PARTE - Lat. ‘By or for one party
‘ or ‘by one side.’
Refers to situations in which only one party (and not the adversary) appears before a judge. Such meetings are often forbidden.
Exactly,, when any other judge meets a party to a pending case outside of the courtroom, it’s an ex parte ethics violation.
And this whole issue is the power structure giving us the finger. “No,, i won’t show my birth certificate”, “No,,being a voter or a candidate doesn’t give you standing to sue to see it”,,, “Screw you voters, and your ability to trust your government, look at us all posing with Obama”,,,
They have no respect for us whatsoever, this proof of citizenship request is simply not unreasonable. And SHOULD be able to be clearly proven in 20 minutes.
I’m no lawyer, but in order for the ex parte argument to hold water in this case, the court case would have to have been discussed. A traditional meeting of justices and presidents elect (both reagan and clinton did this, gw deferred)is what went on here.
The notion that Scalia and Thomas would be parties to an ex parte decision defies common sense. JMO.