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

To: cotton1706

A much better explanation can be found here:

http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65645

From that report:

” If the court was going to issue such a simple, straightforward unanimous ruling, why did it take so long? No doubt more was going on behind the scenes than this simple ruling. We probably will never know what was going on in judicial chambers. A cynic suggested to me the court delayed so much so there would be no time to litigate over whether Democrats have to name a replacement on the ballot.”

Indeed. Of course the Court dragged its feet. They found on the narrowed grounds possible, avoided dealing with the replacement issue on equally narrow grounds, waiting until the last minute and hot footed it out of town. Very typical of the Sebelius Supreme Court that sits in Kansas.

Kobach has given the Dems 8 days to name a replacement and extend the mailing deadline to accomodate that demand. Not sure that was a good idea.


15 posted on 09/18/2014 3:36:06 PM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: centurion316

Of course it is a good idea. Force the rats hand. If they refuse to name a dem candidate, it becomes a huge issue helping Roberts, will galvanize GOP


19 posted on 09/18/2014 3:40:52 PM PDT by mwl8787
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: centurion316

“no time to litigate over whether Democrats have to name a replacement on the ballot”

First thing that crossed my mind.


25 posted on 09/18/2014 4:01:33 PM PDT by lacrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | 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