Skip to comments.
Interview, Orly Taitz: Chief Justice Roberts Calls Conference on Obama Challenge: Lightfoot v. Bowen
Fort Hard Knox ^
| January 7, 2009
| Arlen Williams
Posted on 01/09/2009 8:28:39 PM PST by devere
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700, 701-720, 721-740 ... 1,221-1,230 next last
To: Kevmo
Kevmo - read the document that I referenced in my posts. It provides a great deal of insight into the strategy that justices uses to select cases for conference. It will shine a whole new light on your theory. (In a good way.)
To: Lurking Libertarian
The clerk will distribute (refer, hand, submit) the petition to the Court. That doesn't mean the clerk has the authority to distribute a case for conference by the full Court. Only justices may send a case to conference and even that is done according to seniority. The justice who sends the case to conference is the justice who leads the discussion at conference.
To: BuckeyeTexan
It will shine a whole new light on your theory. (In a good way.)
***Do you agree with my odds analysis? Maybe N is lower than 0.3?
703
posted on
01/15/2009 2:13:10 PM PST
by
Kevmo
( It's all over for this Country as a Constitutional Republic. ~Leo Donofrio, 12/14/08)
To: Kevmo
Has a petition for writ of certiorari been filed for each case?
I followed Donofrio’s case. He declined to file an actual petition and instead expected the court to convert his request for an emergency stay into a writ. (As they did in Bush/Gore.)
I’m far from a mathematician, but your numbers seem logical.
To: Kevmo
P.S. That document has data about the percentage of cases selected for conference. They analyzed 9 terms from 1985 - 1993.
To: BuckeyeTexan; Lurking Libertarian
Thank you both for an informative and adult portion of this rather bizarre and often nasty thread
706
posted on
01/15/2009 2:45:27 PM PST
by
MilspecRob
(Most people don't act stupid, they really are.)
To: MilspecRob; Lurking Libertarian
You’re welcome. Thanks for the acknowledgement. I think we’re trying to keep it civil while disagreeing on the substantive issues.
To: BuckeyeTexan; STARWISE; Frantzie; dennisw; penelopesire; BulletBobCo; seekthetruth; Kevmo; ...
In speaking with various folks today, including Joyce, it was rather curious that the SCOTUS allowed to include the amicus with less than 10 days consideration, and that the other side did NOT object. At least five Justices “approved” to give it the “GRANTED” stamp — and that's significant.
As I and others have noted, the Anderson amicus brief was well written and caused the Justices some pause. The repercussions are serious if they wrongly deny cases as they have, and Obama is later found out to be illegitimate.
Don't think that simply because they don't accept Berg's petition they won't accept subsequent petitions or emergency stays by him or others. The Justices may not mark everything in their considerations when they consider what comes their way...
In Walker v. United States, an over-length (IMO, bloated and poorly written) brief citing over two hundred Supreme Court rulings favoring the position of the plaintiff, Bill Walker of Seattle, Washington, was presented in district court. The court refused to read the document and ultimately, citing Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 433 (1939) established that under the courts political question doctrine, Congress was empowered to ignore or veto the direct text of the Constitution.
Following the court decision, an amicus brief was filed with the Supreme Court of the United States in the cases, McConnell v Federal Election Commission (02-1674 et al.). The purpose of the brief was twofold: (1) To serve as a practice exercise for a new Walker case intended to go to the Supreme Court and (2) to find out whether or not the assertions made in Walker v. United States were in fact true
The fact the amicus was never presented to the Court did not matter. Because the attorneys had reacted so violently, it was obvious by this reaction that what had been stated, that Congress possessed a veto and the effect of that veto was far-reaching, so much so, as to establish the possibility of a dictatorship in the government, that no attorney could accept it.
One document can sometimes have a very powerful, unforeseen effect...
708
posted on
01/15/2009 3:11:08 PM PST
by
BP2
(I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
To: BuckeyeTexan; MilspecRob
To: BP2
Very interesting! And thank you for the ping.
710
posted on
01/15/2009 3:16:24 PM PST
by
MHGinTN
(Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
To: BP2; Calpernia; Fred Nerks; null and void; pissant; george76; PhilDragoo; Candor7; MeekOneGOP; ...
Thank you, BP2.
Ping. There’s no rest for the weary. Who would have thought there’d be anything to ping today.
711
posted on
01/15/2009 3:30:24 PM PST
by
LucyT
("Sleep is for people who can't handle caffeine." ...Slings and Arrows)
To: LucyT
I think Steve Pidgeon (attny from WA) will be on Plains Radio in about a half hour or 7 pm EST.
To: LucyT
I have on the thread about the US Airways ditching, I was away from my puter awhile, trying to get caught up now.
713
posted on
01/15/2009 3:36:44 PM PST
by
Eye of Unk
(How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words! SA)
To: BP2; hoosiermama
To: LucyT
Thanks for the
715
posted on
01/15/2009 3:44:56 PM PST
by
IrishPennant
(Patriotism is strongest when accompanied by bad politics, loyal FRiends and great whiskey)
To: BP2
To: IrishPennant
Heh. Thanks, IrishPennant. I’ve thought of using a similar photo for pings, but wasn’t sure it would be appreciated by everyone.
717
posted on
01/15/2009 3:51:46 PM PST
by
LucyT
("Sleep is for people who can't handle caffeine." ...Slings and Arrows)
To: LucyT
718
posted on
01/15/2009 4:01:01 PM PST
by
1COUNTER-MORTER-68
(THROWING ANOTHER BULLET-RIDDLED TV IN THE PILE OUT BACK~~~~~)
Comment #719 Removed by Moderator
To: LucyT
Thanks for the ping. Steve Pigeon is to be on Plains in a few minutes. At 7 Eastern on Plains with Chalice.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 681-700, 701-720, 721-740 ... 1,221-1,230 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