Skip to comments.
MSNBC- Recall election to be delayed
Pete Williams MSNBC ^
| Pete Williams
Posted on 09/15/2003 10:18:32 AM PDT by Ragirl
California Appeals Court - Recall should be blocked!!!
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...
TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: 2003election; 9thcircuit; 9thcircuitcourt; circus; circustent; davisrecalleelection; democrap; dirtytricks; election2003; floriduhagain; graydavis; impeachthe9th; outofcontrol; recall; thefixisin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400, 401-420, 421-440 ... 801-811 next last
To: snopercod
The six counties concerned are under a watch by Justice to assure compliance with the Voting Rights Act. The Voting Rights act was passed as an enforcement of the 15th Amendment and as such it trumps the Calif constitution as the law to be administered.
The question for appeal is whether this recall election run under present circumstances is any less fair than the 2002 election that re-elected Davis. SCOTUS canoverturn 9th Circuit on the grounds that Justice said nothing about the 2002 election and this is run under the same of similar conditions.
To: Jim Noble
that would mean that any state court, with a majority of liberal judges, could order selective recounts and vote rigging in only Democratic counties, to allow a Democratic candidate for a federal seat to "win".
and the SCOTUS should have let that go forward? we would have paid more dearly in the future if that practice would have been allowed to stand.
To: Cooter
Yes. And that's part of why I expect the Supreme Court to throw out this Ninth Circuit decision.
John / Billybob
403
posted on
09/15/2003 11:27:08 AM PDT
by
Congressman Billybob
(Everyone talks about Congress; I am doing something about it.)
To: All
To: Ragirl
I've read the decision, and I have to say, what a bizare ruling. Judging from how it was written, choices in language and issues not part of the case, this decision was written with the intention of being overturned.
Which makes me wonder if the intention was to force the SCOTUS to overturn /and/ come up with a reason that would weaken the rulings of Bush v Gore, giving a double victory to Democrats who will use both to bash the 'right-wing' SCOTUS and re-energize the vote for 2004.
Were it my choice, I would not appeal this to SCOTUS, but rather within the 9th Circuit...
405
posted on
09/15/2003 11:27:20 AM PDT
by
kingu
(I'm voting for Arnold, if I'm allowed to.)
To: Dan from Michigan
Federal Judges MAY be impeached, however. But considering the climate in the Senate these days, highly unlikely.
To: mhking
According to the ACLU and the 9th. Circuit, you and me ain't smart enough to vote with the white folk.
407
posted on
09/15/2003 11:27:32 AM PDT
by
Luis Gonzalez
("As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." - Abraham Lincoln)
To: Howlin
How embarassing for "minorities." The minorities should be pissed off at how the Democrats view them
408
posted on
09/15/2003 11:27:42 AM PDT
by
Mo1
(http://www.favewavs.com/wavs/cartoons/spdemocrats.wav)
To: WOSG
It's outrageous that recall proponents didn't have the emergency appeal immediately ready within an hour of this Ninth Circus decision... clearly they should have expected the worst and planned accordingly.
409
posted on
09/15/2003 11:27:42 AM PDT
by
mwl1
To: Cooter
That is exactly what is starting piss me off. I'm am so F***ing furious right now I can barely sit. Why in the hell does this country have rules and constitutions if they are going to be ignored at every damn opportunity. It is like these ass bag liberals can't read English. I mean I can read and the damn thing says no less than 60 days and not more than 80 days. I can't for the life of me read where it says the 9th must protect the little illegal mexican grandma's constitutional right to not have to use a punch card ballot. That damn punch card ballot was good enough for the general election - why not now? Is it maybe because the liberals are about to have their asses handed to them? Damn I am pissed
To: mwl1
This is different - the NJ SC is a state court - the 9th Circuit is a federal court, and SCOTUS has jurisdiction.
411
posted on
09/15/2003 11:28:21 AM PDT
by
bootless
(Never Forget)
To: Hoverbug
I have to clean up anything I say or post about these despicable POS's posing as judges.
The stench from that bench is overwhelming.
412
posted on
09/15/2003 11:28:26 AM PDT
by
Grampa Dave
(May our brave warriors kill all of the Islamokazis/facists/nazis to prevent future 9/11's.)
To: feinswinesuksass
Many have already cast their votes. Absentee ballots.
The court is stopping the election right in the middle.
413
posted on
09/15/2003 11:29:04 AM PDT
by
concerned about politics
(Lucifers lefties are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
To: steveegg
Just a point of clarification: that's not Jon Scott, it's Greg Jerred.
To: WOSG
Reinhardt wasn't on the Ninth Circus panel that issued the per curiam opinion. But Paez was.
To: A_Niceguy_in_CA
14th Amendment - Equal Protection
416
posted on
09/15/2003 11:29:39 AM PDT
by
carton253
(All I need to know about Islam I learned on 9/11/2001)
To: snopercod
How does a Federal Court have jurisdiction over a state election for a state office? Same question I was asking during the Florida 2000 fiasco. I was flamed repeatedly for saying that the feds had no business interfering.
Big difference. In Florida, they were changing the rules of the election after the fact in order to change the outcome of a federal election, something specifically forbidden. In this case, they are interfering in a process specifically enshrined in a state constitution regargding the election of a state official. Apples and oranges, my friend.
To: Luis Gonzalez
Here's one hispanic who seems to know what he's doing when it comes to using the punch card ballot.
Why does Bustamante look like a mad scientist here?
418
posted on
09/15/2003 11:30:08 AM PDT
by
Mr. Mulliner
("Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable." - George Orwell)
To: Luis Gonzalez
Here's the text from the ruling:
Dr. Brady also concluded that the use of pre-scored punchcard voting systems discriminated against minorities in several respects. First, the six punchcard counties have a larger percentage of minorities (46%) than nonpunchcard counties (32%). Second, the analysis indicated that when pre-scored punchcard systems were used, minority voters had significantly higher residual vote rates than non-minorities.
419
posted on
09/15/2003 11:30:09 AM PDT
by
snopercod
(Awake! for Morning in the Bowl of Night Has flung the Stone that puts the Stars to Flight:)
To: mwl1
I'm sure they've got most of the paperwork squared away and ready to be filed, but they needed to wait until they had the actual text of the opinion so they know exactly what to refute and how.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400, 401-420, 421-440 ... 801-811 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson