NJ Supreme Court Hearing Live Thread

New Jersey Public TV ^ | 10/02/02 | TonyInOhio

[TonyInOhio]

New Jersey Public TV is carrying this hearing live. Click on Watch Live Online, and post what you hear, here.

Tony

[LisaFab]

Justices upset with GOP guy because they have already ruled and are now just trying to make it doable.

Sad but true. Pub lawyer once again trying to cite actual legal precedents...again, not allowable in NJ it seems.

[KsSunflower]

OH, my God!! We apparently have no rule of law in this country.

He is removing his name, just because he was losing. Hello, NJSC! They can't send this election into turmoil just because he doesn't think he can win it!!

This is totally insane! These justices must have conferred with their friends in Florida.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

. There is no doubt in my mind that the decision has had already been made, thanks in part to behind-the-scenes politics from Clinton, McAwfull, and the DNC. This is a disgrace to the American election process and the Constitution.

Yes, The GOP had a day and a half to prepare, probably as shell shocked by the nonsense he's hearing as we are. VLWC had how long to prepare this scam?

[tomkat]

it's over, imho.
NJ has made itself a laughingstock today

what the f**k is happening to this country ...

[bonesmccoy]

i've noticed that the Cspan 3 on-line digital feed is unreliable. It appears like someone is pulling the plug on the computer system as the NRSC attorney speaks key arguments on the Carnahan case! (Just being paranoid?).

[Torie]

No one has made the point that allowing an exception in this case would render the statute a nullity. The 51 day rule would be gone. The new standard would be could a switch be administratively accomplished. If this circumstance allows an evasion, every circumstance would. Dropping out because you are losing is the weakest possible circumstance possible. Sad.

[Wphile]

Aaaacckkkkkk! I just got online. I can't believe what I am reading. I was holding out hope that we still have an election process and honest judiciary. That hope is fading fast. The dems are so crooked.

[McLynnan]

Court appears hostile to Forrester's attorney. This is NOT good.

[Howlin]

Whatever is happening, they're doing it right in front of our very eyes.

[twigs]

behind-the-scenes politics from Clinton, McAwfull, and the DNC.

Then they had better watch their backs. People who can verify Clinton's behind-the-scenes shenanigans often meet their maker earlier than they would have otherwise!

[1Old Pro]

Pub lawyer once again trying to cite actual legal precedents...

He just did it. Justices now saying we need two viable candidates. Chief is yelling at him.

[Fury]

Their law says if a candidate drops out, it is a "Fatal defect" but NJ does not say that. Implication, IMHO, is that in NJ non-compliance with the law means nothing. She asked the dem lawyer if he thought there was an important point to be inferred but he missed the softball totally. Now she is beating the republican over it.

Ask yourself this question - If the fatal defect clause was in NJ Law, would there still be an issue? I believe yes, because the Dems can still claim voters are being disenfranchised.

[Redbob]

Seems like the Court is going to preempt the will of the voters, based on a poll!

[Howlin]

It's done. They're not letting him express a complete thought.

[Torie]

The attorney is a milktoast.

[chnsmok]

Oviously they are graduates of the Patrick Leahy School of Law.

[McLynnan]

Mine also kept breaking up. Try refreshing the page -- seemed to fix it for me.

[5by5]

Maybe the NJSC should get Torch to testify as to why he quit.

[wingnuts'nbolts]

It is yet again, an attempt by the Democrats to usurp the Constitution, set case law, and hyjack the electoral system.
They cannot be allowed to get away with it, They are trying this in Hawaii, too. And in Carnahan's case they printed absentee ballots with the wrong party affiliation on them, some of which have been returned already.

[jackbill]

What about the Non-DemocRAT voters? Don't they have rights?