|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
villager (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:12 PM Original message |
Appeals Court to *Reconsider* Calif. Recall Vote |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ewagner (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:15 PM Response to Original message |
1. I've been thinking about this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
villager (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:19 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. this would get the Supreme Court "off the hook" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:24 PM Response to Reply #1 |
5. So many angles. The Republicans definitely didn't want this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Pltcl_jnky (429 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:27 PM Response to Reply #5 |
6. actually |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:38 PM Response to Reply #6 |
10. I believe that's the EXIT strategy. But I'm more sure Repbus want Gov bad |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MarianJack (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:35 PM Response to Reply #1 |
9. Possible, but... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:21 PM Response to Original message |
3. Appealing to the full court is one of the avenues for appeal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nothingshocksmeanymore (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:24 PM Response to Reply #3 |
4. It was a foregone conclusion that on a matter this important an en banc |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
villager (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:28 PM Response to Reply #4 |
7. interesting points, both |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nothingshocksmeanymore (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:41 PM Response to Reply #7 |
11. Don't know..AP or Jack Swift could better respond. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:43 PM Response to Reply #7 |
13. It means that all 25 judges hear the case, with the majority ruling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:33 PM Response to Reply #4 |
8. Exactly, en banc was a no brainer. The media whores suck. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
villager (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:41 PM Response to Reply #8 |
12. how often are things "en banc'd?" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:47 PM Response to Reply #12 |
15. I'm probalby not the most qualified person to answer this question, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
villager (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 04:56 PM Response to Reply #15 |
23. hmmm... thanks... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zhade (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:44 PM Response to Reply #8 |
14. Good catch. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AP (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:49 PM Response to Reply #14 |
16. I bet it's the 4th - the most conservative - that is most often over- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nothingshocksmeanymore (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 02:55 PM Response to Reply #16 |
17. It depends on HOW you base it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
piece sine (931 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 03:17 PM Response to Reply #3 |
18. California law is claer... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rowdyboy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 04:09 PM Response to Reply #18 |
19. Well there was that pesky Supreme Court ruling in 2000 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
villager (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 04:14 PM Response to Reply #19 |
21. yes, the petard-hoisting |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
CO Liberal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 04:14 PM Response to Reply #18 |
20. In Cases Where The Voters Rights Act May Be Violated |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nothingshocksmeanymore (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 04:31 PM Response to Reply #18 |
22. The FEDERAL ISSUE IS THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
nadinbrzezinski (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-16-03 04:58 PM Response to Reply #22 |
24. and the Freedom to Vote Act |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Fri Dec 27th 2024, 04:40 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC