Posted on 10/07/2002 10:53:40 AM PDT by Howlin
It's done!
First, we had a corrupt, abusive decision by the NJSC. Second, we had a mistaken decision by the USSC. My guess is that we had just three votes - Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas.
The USSC has the luxury of believing that all is well -- the system still works. If we lived in their cocoon, we might feel the same. They do not and cannot appreciate -- with the obvious exception of Clarence Thomas -- the ends to which these evil people on the left will go to advance their cause and retain power illegally.
This was a dark day. There is no escaping that, and no rationalizations that "it is now up to the voters of New Jersey" can wipe away the fact that the rule of law took a big hit.
I am a lot more worried about the integrity of the law than I am about one Senate seat.
The order denying the stay reads, "The application for stay presented to Justice Souter and by him referred to the Court is denied."
Seeking a preliminary injuction is different than appealing a decision. The reality is, however, that in failing to grant the stay, it will be far more difficult to have the Court grant the Cert petition and overrule the Supreme Court.
For those of you interested, you should read the concurrence to Bush v. Gore by Scalia, Rehnquist, and Thomas. They found that Article 2, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution allowed only the State legislatures to set the "time, manner and Place" of a Presidential election. Accordingly, they would have found that the Florida Supreme Court had no business, at all, in changing the rules set forth by the legislature. Article 1, Section 4, has the exact same language, only it applies to Senators. Thus, one can logically conclude that thee are only three Justices willing to use the same rationale to overturn this decision. (3 obviously won't do it, and you need four just to grant the petition for Cert.) Accordingly, I think it is over, as there is no other Federal Question pending that would involve the Supreme Court, IMHO.
As most Freepers know, merely being really wrong does not get you to the U.S. Supreme Court. Absent a federal Question, or a disagreement between the States, the U.S. Supremes will not intervene.(Ironically, to do so would be judicial activism outside the bounds of the scope of the Court's authority, which isn't permitted even if it were to slap-down a renegade Court like New Jersey).
Billybob
I truly can't believe this. R.I.P. America. Now you'll get the congressthings your betters select for you.
They've been all over the place today. Probably some liberal arts community college class in Ithaca is down in the computer lab today.
In the event of a vacancy, howsoever caused, among candidates nominated at primaries, which vacancy shall occur not later than the 51st day before the general election, or in the event of inability to select a candidate because of a tie vote at such primary, a candidate shall be selected in the following manner:"
Not exactly a model of well-written law, I must say. It seems to set out procedures to fill vacancies that occur prior to the 51st day, but doesn't actually forbid filling vacancies after that time. I believe that was one of grounds to the NJSC position, which compared it to similar but clearer language in NY that actually did forbid filling vacancies.
When a person so declines his nomination, or if a petition or certificate of nomination, or if any nomination, be insufficient or inoperative, or if a nominee shall die, or for any reason vacate his nomination, the vacancy so occasioned may be filled in the manner outlined in the succeeding sections.
(19:13-19 deals with a a nomination by petition, which does not apply)
In the event of a vacancy, howsoever caused, among candidates nominated at primaries, which vacancy shall occur not later than the 51st day before the general election, or in the event of inability to select a candidate because of a tie vote at such primary, a candidate shall be selected in the following manner:
a. (1) In the case of an office to be filled by the voters of the entire State, the candidate shall be selected by the State committee of the political party wherein such vacancy has occurred....
b. (4) Whenever in accordance with the provisions of subsection a. of this section the State committee of a political party is empowered to select a candidate to fill a vacancy, it shall be the responsibility of the chairman of that State committee to give notice to each of the members of the committee of the date, time and place of the meeting at which the selection will be made, that meeting to be held at least one day following the date on which the notice is given....
d. A selection made pursuant to this section shall be made not later than the 48th day preceding the date of the general election, and a statement of such selection shall be filed with the Secretary of State or the appropriate county clerk, as the case may be, not later than said 48th day, and in the following manner:
(1) A selection made by a State committee of political party shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the State chairman of the political party....
My guess is that most dimo politicians at the state and federal level ARE lawyers. Another reason to despise them, as if we needed another. The party of evil strikes again. I thought I detected a disturbance in the force this morning. :O)
And unfortunately (or fortunately in my case) it's not yet legal to follow the advice of Shakespeare in Henry VII, "First, kill all the lawyers."
Did you hear that the National Institutes of Health have stopped experimenting on white rats? They're using lawyers for three reasons:
1. There's plenty of them.
2. You don't get emotionally attached to them.
3. There are sme things the rats won't do.
Congressman Billybob
Click for "Oedipus and the Democrats"
No judiciary committee... just an immediate discharge to the floor.
I don't think anoyone imagined 200+ years ago that the prestige of the court would be dragged into the mud by these gutter rats. You are correct, after the assault the SCOTUS (quite unfairly) received by the dims and their leftist sycophants in the media, they would not be in a hurry to bite into another dimocrat sh*t Soufflet. Which is precisely what these activists counted on.
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.