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

To: Nephi

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.


41 posted on 01/28/2009 8:38:53 AM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: dmz
The notion that Scalia and Thomas would be parties to an ex parte decision defies common sense. JMO.

The notion that Scalia and Thomas met ex parte is supported by the photographic evidence.

Did Reagan and Clinton have cases pending before the SCOTUS at the time of the meetings you cite?

45 posted on 01/28/2009 8:52:00 AM PST by Nephi (Like the failed promise of Fascism, masquerading as Capitalism? You're gonna love Marxism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | 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