MSNBC- Recall election to be delayed

Pete Williams MSNBC ^ | Pete Williams

[Ragirl]

California Appeals Court - Recall should be blocked!!!

[Revolting cat!]

"Woo, hoo! I'll be famous until March! I get to sell more of my videos!" -- Mary Carey

[Warren_Piece]

Maybe you can help me here. Everyone is saying that if illegals get driver's licenses they will be able to vote. I have no doubt they will try, but isn't this illegal?. I mean, isn't there some provision in the constitution that one has to be a citizen in order to vote?

[CounterCounterCulture]

May this backfire in their faces ten-fold.

[WOSG]

If they calim to be based on Bush v Gore, it's a deliberately corrupted version of Bush v Gore, which recognized different voting procedures in different districts as valid parts of elections (viz Scalia concurrence).

In any case, the 202 election was valid but this cannot be - with the same equipment?

The 9th *knows* what they are doing is pulling it out of a hat. They are willing co-conspirators with the ACLU in defying democracy. par for the judicial activist course.

[over3Owithabrain]

I don't challenge your legal acumen, CBB. My thoughts are political. If SCOTUS overturns the 9th, this will give the Dems more ammo to whine, "there they go again", etc.. It's factually wrong of course but when did that matter?

OTOH, if the 9th ruling stands, roughly two-thirds of voting Californians will be PO'd and feel disenfranchised. The Dems will be the ones viewed as overturning the people's will. Davis will continue to mismanage the state, and the result will be an angry electorate in '04. Ah-nold's plastic candidacy will be less of a factor too.

So personally, ?i don't see this as a loss, JMO.

[TontoKowalski]

Does that make it harder for them to now take up a California election case when it refused to take up a New Jersey election case?

In the New Jersey race, the Supreme Court refused to take the appeal (wrongly in my opinion) because the New Jersey State Supreme Court ruled on a State law issue.

In this case a Federal Court has ruled on the basis of a Federal issue (minority voting rights). Just because they didn't take the New Jersey case is no indication that they won't take the California case. Of course, it's no guarantee they will take it, either.

[mwl1]

Keith, the USSC has appellate jurisdiction over both federal circuit courts of appeals and the 50 state supreme courts -- Article III of the US Constitution.

That does not mean they will hear this case or take any other action, it just means that they have jurisdiction.

[Weimdog]

JELLO BIAFRA - the government is evil, big corporations are evil, the main stream media is evil, democrats are evil, republicans are even more evil, our capitalist society is evil, the Green Party is the only way, and a socialist form of government is the only way. Jello is as left wing as Pat Buchanan is right wing.

Jello and the DK's were fun and irreverent when I was a teenager, but they are actually quite silly now.

[writmeister]

One difference from New Jersey is that it was the New Jersey Supreme Court interpreting a New Jersey statute -- typically state courts are viewed as the highest authority in interpreting state law. No USSC jurisdiction unless federal constitutional law issue.

Here, the 9th Circuit delayed the recall based based on federal constitutional law -- equal protection/due process.

[veronica]

SAN FRANCISCO (CNN) --"A federal appeals court has blocked the Oct. 7 California recall, but stayed its order for seven days to allow an appeal. The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals follows a hearing last week in which the American Civil Liberties Union sought a postponment of the vote. The ACLU argued that election officials should have more time to replace antiquated voting machines in several California counties."

[steveegg]

Thanks, John. 'Tis good to have someone who has done this before around these parts (compared to someone who merely knows most of the motions like FoxNews).

[virgil]

Didn't the people of California vote to have this recall? So, the 9th is actually overturning the popular vote to have the recall and at the same time is ruling to prevent another lawful election? It's despicable. Shame.

[Kadric]

"They refused to take the New Jersey case with Torrecelli saying it was a state's issue."

And this is why I believe they will take the case the 9th is a fedreal court while this is a state issue.

[Congressman Billybob]

No, the issues in this case have nothing to do with the issues in Bush v. Gore. And I say that as a lawyer who filed one of the winning briefs in the first Bush case.

John / Billybob

[WOSG]

"As Rush L. just pointed out the SCOTUS last avoided state election issues as they came up in the Torricelli race. "

Yeah, but that was a NJ Supreme Court ... here it's a federal court doing the dirty deed. Wholly Federal issues, cannot be ducked.

[BurbankKarl]

well, yes, you have to be a citizen to vote, but one can easily register without anyone knowing...

it is illegal to sneak into the country too....

[Wphile]

Brit can talk all he wants about the court isn't supposed to determine the "public interest" but it won't do any good. The courts have totally become about determining the public interest versus interpreting the law. Those days are long gone, I'm afraid.

[flamefront]

(from the removed thread:

Posted by TheLooseThread to flamefront
On News/Activism 09/15/2003 10:37 AM PDT #55 of 59

In CA the republicans have split their vote. Bustamonte currently leads because of that. As it stands now he was the likely winner.

Now the republicans (and Arnold) have time to choose one to run and the other to drop out.

Not necessarily -
There is still time for Arnold and Tom to resolve things as it stood until today with three weeks left and they both have yet to be in a debate together.

Further the addition of the moter-votered Jan 1st drivers license registrations will add many to the Dems voter rolls.

Besides the goal of the leftists all along has been to diminish the energy of the recall campaign. Now they are succeeding.

Forget the strategery rationalization.

[Republicus2001]

TIME TO IMPEACH SOME JUDGES

anyone know the procedure for recalling judges?