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

To: Canedawg
IMO you dont need to prove “damages” to prove a statute is unconstitutional.

That's good to hear. I was only relaying what Judge Napolitano said about how long the case would take to get to the Supreme Court.

Later in the thread several people mentioned that the Supreme Court can "reach down" and take the case at their own discretion. If there were ever a case where they needed to exercise that option, this is it.

174 posted on 03/27/2010 10:54:41 AM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]


To: Windflier

I happened to hear Judge Nap a little while ago while driving home and I was listening to the Monica Crowley show. he mentioned that he thought the lower federal courts would be throwing out large chunks of this bill as soon as they reviewed it.

It wont take too long for the cases to reach the lower courts, and then more time to work their way up through the appellate process.

It is possible that the SCOTUS will step in if multiple lower courts start rendering inconsistent rulings on various parts of the law.


186 posted on 03/27/2010 1:26:16 PM PDT by Canedawg (Deem this regime to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | 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