Posted on 10/11/2002 7:53:12 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob
I have just checked to find out what documents were filed in the US Supreme Court by Doug Forrester. The lamestream media has blown it, big time. So has the Court's Press Office. Forrester has NOT filed anything new in the Supreme Court this week. On the other hand, the case is still live.
Last week, Forrester filed TWO documents with the US SC. One was the Request for Emergency Relief (which was denied not by Justice Souter alone, but by the whole Court). The other, however, was a Petition for Writ of Certiorari, which is the standard request for the Court to take a case in due course.
Somewhere between Justice Souter's office and the Clerk's Office they LOST TRACK of the Petition for Cert. The Press Office released the FALSE information that only the Request for Emergency Relief had been filed. A lawyer for the National Republican Senatorial Court had to trot over to the Court and point out that there were TWO documents filed, not just one.
Late yesterday, the Court "FOUND" the Petition for Cert, which has NOT been acted upon. The Clerk docketed that paper. The press noticed the docketing, and assumed that Forrester had filed a new case. This was a false conclusion, based on the Court's Press Office getting things wrong at the beginning.
Bottom line: the status of this case in the Supreme Court is exactly what I surmised. The case is dead for emergency relief, but it is very much alive for decision in due course (meaning about eight months from now).
The US SC does not have a set deadline to decide whether to take any case. They certainly will not decide whether to take this one until they see the election results in New Jersey. If Forrester wins, I think it highly likely that four Justices will vote to take the case (that's all it takes), and that will be done. The case will be briefed, argued, and decided.
If Lautenberg wins, the Court will have painted itself into a corner. If they rule for Forrester, what is the remedy? Does the US SC dare issue an Order throwing out a Member of the Senate? To avoid embarrassing themselves, the Court would be unlikely to take the case in that situation.
What I have just said here is the plain unvarnished truth. Anything you read to the contrary in the lamestream media is hogwash. Trust me, I know these things.
Billybob
Because the legality of the change is a matter of legal opinion. It is not cut and dried like bank robbery. Everyone knows what bank robbery is and that it is illegal under both state and federal law. The Supreme Court of NJ has stated that the change was legal. Therefore your analogy sucks. Until the SCOTUS overturns the NJ court decision, that is the law.
NO
Billybob
I agree, and I think Bush vs. Gore was wrongly decided-the Court announced a power it did not have.
The remedy for the Florida mess is in the Constitution-the "judge" of which electors from Florida are valid is the House and Senate in Joint Session with the Vice President in the Chair.
Similarly, the NJ Legislature, which has the power and the duty to prescribe the manner in which Senators are chosen, is the injured party here. If they fail to act, there is no relief.
Billybob
Somewhere between Justice Souter's office and the Clerk's Office they LOST TRACK of the Petition for Cert. The Press Office released the FALSE information that only the Request for Emergency Relief had been filed. A lawyer for the National Republican Senatorial Court had to trot over to the Court and point out that there were TWO documents filed, not just one.
I can just see some aids infected Rat intern making sure the the petition got lost!
Might the improper handling not have been deliberate on somebody's part?
Thank you for your interest and your questions. I hope I've provided adequate information to each of you.
If you like the quality of my thinking and my work, please click the link below and see if you'd appreciate a copy of my latest book.
Congressman Billybob
But that means a special election. And if Forrester cant beat Lautenburg this November, why would he able to in February or April. The Court is not going to hand the election to Forrester. He has to win it at some point.
You're absolutely correct, but I should point out that the IN precedent you're referring to was done by the 'Craps. 'Craps can get away with it, but Pubbies cannot, and will not even try. Refer to the Loretta Sanchez and Landrieu cases.
It's unfair, but it's also life.
I'd like to see it, but there isn't a Pubbie in the Senate "leadership" I can see who would do it.
Good point.
The President of The Senate.
I don't know about that. Maybe the Rats have someone they like better than Lautenberg.
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.