To: DJ MacWoW
The Supreme Court should decline to accept this case at all...It’s a state matter.
17 posted on
01/25/2011 10:24:05 AM PST by
Heavyrunner
(Socialize this.)
To: Heavyrunner
Agreed, just as they declined to hear the NJ Torecelli/Lautenberg case.
-PJ
19 posted on
01/25/2011 10:27:44 AM PST by
Political Junkie Too
("Comprehensive" reform bills only end up as incomprehensible messes.)
To: Heavyrunner
iT IS THE Eillinois Supreme Court
26 posted on
01/25/2011 10:33:19 AM PST by
70th Division
(I love my country but fear my government!)
To: Heavyrunner
iT IS THE Eillinois Supreme Court
37 posted on
01/25/2011 10:40:55 AM PST by
70th Division
(I love my country but fear my government!)
To: Heavyrunner
The Supreme Court should decline to accept this case at all... I think they SHOULD take it up. But, the only available slot given their heavy schedule, would be to hear the case, in toto, at 1/25 9:00 PM. Shouldn't take more than 2 hours.
46 posted on
01/25/2011 10:50:44 AM PST by
C210N
(0bama, Making the US safe for Global Marxism)
To: Heavyrunner
"The Supreme Court should decline to accept this case at all...It’s a state matter." To misquote Scarlett O'Hara "Just like Florida in 2000, just like Florida in 2000!"
What was it all those libturds said after the Supremes refused to get involved in the election that Algore lost: Selected, not elected?
94 posted on
01/25/2011 7:15:20 PM PST by
West Texas Chuck
(Eat the young, 100 million guppies can't be wrong.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson