[Congressman Billybob]

Dear John,

The plan I knew about, and had been floated at the White House, involved three steps. 1) Attorney General Ashcroft issues an Opinion detailing the unconstitutionality of Shays-Meehan. 2) President Bush states flatly that the law is uncontitutional, but then signs it to force a judicial review. 3) Solicitor General Olson is directed not only to oppose the law, rather than support it (the usual role of the SG), but to file suit immediately for a preliminary injunction against any use of the law, by anyone, anywhere, until the Supreme Court ruled on it.

No reason to go into the details of the plan (which I got to read), because obviously the White House decided on a different course of action. The plan did offer a chance at getting the final Supreme Court decision BEFORE the November elections.

As it is, the case will be filed 6 November, 2002, on the effective date of the law. The final decision of the Supreme Court to declare the law unconstitutional, will come in may, 2003, give or take a few weeks.

The only guarantee I can offer is this: If we do not get this law declared unconstitutional, I will resign from the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States. I feel that strongly about the issue, and about our odds of success.

FReepers, including you, my friend, have done all that you could, and your efforts have not been enough. Now it is time for the First Amendment attorneys to go to war. This will be my 17th and second most important brief in that Court. (Most important was the brief on the Bush case from Florida.)

I presume you wish me good hunting.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "The Truman Factor."

[Bigun]

I presume you wish me good hunting.

Indeed! We wish you EVERY success in this matter but your, and others efforts in the courts, in NO way addresses the FACT that we have currently, at least 240 Congressmen, 60 Senators, and a President who either DO NOT UNDERSTAND the Constitution and their oaths of office or just don't GIVE A DAMN about either!

[okiedust]

Well, I wish you good hunting. It is hard to see that the Bush administration will challenge this given the rhetoric they have used. I can't reconcile the fact the president stated that there are Constitutional issues but he will sign it. Unless of course they do have a plan to challenge it. That would certainly put a stake in it if it goes to the Supreme Court immediately. There is a steep political cost to Bush if he just signs and accepts this bill. Conservatives get mad when a politician abandons principle, liberals get mad when a politician takes goodies away. People do not care about not having CFR, but they care very much about having it. The polls that show this is not a big issue do not address that side of the equation. Bush will pay a big price for signing if he does not have a plan to deal with the "Constitutional Issues."

regards

[eureka!]

"I presume you [all] wish me good hunting."

I sure do CB. Thanks for sharing. I liked the idea of option one and, like JH2, wish that W would veto it--with great fanfare and inflamatory language about an assault on free speech etc.

And John, you are right. Joe and Jane Public don't give two hoots about this. May the McPressholes' 'victory' be very short-lived....

[MamaLucci]

What am I missing? Why can't the plan you heard about still take place?

[JohnHuang2]

I presume you wish me good hunting.

More than wishing, I'll be praying for you, my friend.