- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:07 am to EKG
quote:
Shannon Stevenson
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:08 am to EKG
From the earlier AP link:
quote:
4 min ago
The court sounds very open to leaving Trump on the ballot
BY NICHOLAS RICCARDI
Just about every justice has asked pointed, skeptical questions of Murray. Even the Democratic-appointed ones haven’t thrown him lifelines.
Murray argues the only reason Section 3 hasn’t come up in the past 150 years is because no one engaged in an act as grave as Jan. 6. Justice Kavanagh scoffed at that, noting that the reason is more likely because a judge in 1869 ruled that only Congress can create a process to disqualify officeholders and the law Congress passed to do that has sunsetted.
That may be a hint as to one direction the court could go to in disposing the case.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:08 am to Vacherie Saint
Getting that 10 minutes with SCOTUS is something she will regret.
This will be like Mike Tyson vs anyone around 1988-1989.
This will be like Mike Tyson vs anyone around 1988-1989.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:08 am to MrLSU
quote:
It speaks to the younger generation of lawyers who are so self-absorbed and insulated due to growing up with no social interaction that they never learned how to talk to others and respect those with authority.
Haha...you just diagnosed SFP.....
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:09 am to oogabooga68
So she just said she thinks the SOS can decide who goes on the ballot and who doesnt.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:09 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
It's a terrible argument that should have never seen the light of day. I guess it's not his fault it's being brought.
When I was very young, I had a trial judge grant a motion that never should have been granted and it was appealed. At the oral argument I was peppered with questions and my only response was that it was not my fault the judge granted it.
Courtroom was packed with lawyers I knew. It was a stupid argument so I guess I get what he is receiving
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:10 am to Lsut81
quote:
So she just said she thinks the SOS can decide who goes on the ballot and who doesnt.
Yeah, that’s not going to bite her on the arse AT ALL.
Sounds like the mullahs in Iran determining who can even be on the ballot.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:10 am to Lsut81
yep and the candidate has no due process in the matter.
its absurd. But they have to argue the absurdity because this is lawfare, not law.
its absurd. But they have to argue the absurdity because this is lawfare, not law.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:12 am to Vacherie Saint
Hopefully the court issues the decision first thing of next week and puts this to bed.
These people are fricking scum
These people are fricking scum
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:13 am to Lsut81
If they do that, it would be totally out of the ordinary for SCOTUS.
Their decisions usually aren’t released for months.
Their decisions usually aren’t released for months.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:14 am to Vacherie Saint
Alito: should we be concerned with individual judges in states unilaterally determining who we are allowed to vote for?
Stevenson: Its really not a big deal.
Stevenson: Its really not a big deal.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:15 am to oogabooga68
quote:
Haha...you just diagnosed SFP.....
He's a wolf in sheep's clothing. Pretends to be one thing but obviously his arguments here says he is another.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:15 am to teke184
quote:
If they do that, it would be totally out of the ordinary for SCOTUS.
Their decisions usually aren’t released for months.
This is time sensitive though... the CO primary is in just a few weeks, right?
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:15 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Stevenson: Its really not a big deal.
Ceding that time to the guy who just got buttfricked by Kagan with a strap on probably would have been a good idea for her.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:16 am to teke184
quote:
If they do that, it would be totally out of the ordinary for SCOTUS.
They have to, all analysts have said this will come out in weeks at the latest because Super Tuesday is less than a month away.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:16 am to teke184
I'm thinking 9-0 and early opinion with limited discussion- one point maybe 2
I don't think the lib handlers want this case to bring out what absolute idiots they are when it's easy to let others handle this loser.
I don't think the lib handlers want this case to bring out what absolute idiots they are when it's easy to let others handle this loser.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:16 am to EKG
I'm not a lawyer and I'm sure this has been said, but isn't this as simple as how can you penalize somebody who hasn't been found guilty? Wouldn't this clearly violate innocent until proven guilty? This seems like a judge giving a defendant 20 years at the arraignment
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:16 am to teke184
Common sense tells me this ought to be a unanimous decision.
Experience tells me at least one Justice will dissent.
I predict Sotomayor will hold the lone dissenting opinion.
Experience tells me at least one Justice will dissent.
I predict Sotomayor will hold the lone dissenting opinion.
Posted on 2/8/24 at 11:16 am to Corso
LOL, all the Justices avoided her because her argument was just plain DUMB.
Page 8 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News