Posted on 01/25/2024 5:44:06 PM PST by Red Badger
Apparently this is easy for John Kennedy to do. I thought it was a rehash of something that occurred months ago now, but I see it’s a new one.
What boxes did she check by Biden’s staff of know-nothings?
Skewered like a souvlakia!
THAT is the kind of bulldog tenacity we need much much more of !
Any first year law student should know what a contract of adhesion is.
Nonabrasive, direct, to the point and smacks them down like the old whack-a-mole game!
sighs....
More of this please.
Thank you Senator Kennedy.
Tatt
In the U.S. court system, a stay and an injunction are both legal concepts, but they serve different purposes.
1. **Stay:**
- A stay is a temporary halt or suspension of judicial proceedings or the enforcement of a court order.
- It can be issued by a court to delay a case or specific proceedings for a certain period, often to allow for other legal processes to unfold.
- For example, a court may grant a stay to postpone a trial while an appeal is pending.
2. **Injunction:**
- An injunction is a court order that requires a party to either do or refrain from doing a specific act.
- It can be temporary (preliminary injunction) or permanent (permanent injunction), depending on the circumstances.
- Injunctions are often sought to prevent irreparable harm or to maintain the status quo during legal proceedings.
- For example, a court might issue an injunction to stop someone from engaging in certain activities that are alleged to be causing harm until a final decision is reached in a case.
In summary, a stay is a temporary pause in legal proceedings, while an injunction is a court order directing a party to take or refrain from specific actions. They are tools used by the court to manage the legal process and protect the rights of the parties involved.
Credit ChatGPT
He researches his subject, he delves into everything the nominee may or may not have done in their past...and he never, ever asks a question that he does not know the answer to.
I wonder if anyone would have the good sense to nominate Kennedy as a justice to the USSC? If they did I wonder if he would take it? He runs these nominees through the wringer and shows them to be unqualified regardless of their race or persuasion.
Well she’s not qualified for the position but she checks the right boxes so she’ll sail right through confirmation.
No president is ever going to nominate anyone over 70 to the Supreme Court. Not ever.
“What boxes did she check by Biden’s staff of know-nothings?”
Apparently the most important ones, black, women, left of Stalin, average at best intelligence.
I was reading about the bell curve today.
Certain jews are at the top of the IQ ladder, then east asians then whites and at the bottom is you know who. However you know who have more fast twitch muscles which allow a quick burst of power.
Of course there are many exceptions.
Makes sense but I can dream. He would at least be entertaining for as long as he could last.
He’s a smart country lawyer, the kind they used to write great novels about.
“More Biden DEI Judicial Hires: Dumb-Evasive-Ignorant........................”
One gets the impression that this is all that gets evacuated from the bowels of our legal education establishments, no matter how green the ivy league.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.