Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

7 retired judges picked to hear Moore's appeal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-04 09:17 AM
Original message
7 retired judges picked to hear Moore's appeal
If you're keeping up with the continuing saga of former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Judge Roy "10 Commandments" Moore.
Harry Wilters is a friend and neighbor. I know he can't talk about it now, but I'm hoping to get the lowdown after the hearing.
BTW, I do NOT think Moore will be reinstated.
I had a conversation with Harry, long before he was appointed to this panel, and I don't think I should say any more about that.
;-)

From Staff, AP Reports

MONTGOMERY — Roy Moore's fight over the Ten Commandments keeps taking extraordinary turns.

Seven retired judges, including a former governor, were selected randomly Monday to hear Moore's appeal of his ouster as chief justice, the latest unprecedented twist in the case.

The seven chosen include former Gov. John Patterson, who is also a retired criminal appeals court judge, and retired Supreme Court Justice Janie Shores, who became the first woman elected to the court. She served as a justice for 22 years.

The other replacement judges are retired Supreme Court Justice Reneau Almon; retired civil appeals Judge William E. Robertson; retired Baldwin County Circuit Judge Harry J. Wilters Jr.; retired Mobile County Circuit Judge Braxton Kittrell; and retired Circuit Judge J. Richmond Pearson of Leroy.

http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/news/031216/judges.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
oldshoe Donating Member (127 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-04 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. Did anyone else...
...notice the comment that the judges were randomly chosen? That is actually great news, because it takes away the bias-argument, and may begin to set some precedent about other judicial appointments. I'd love to federal judges randomly picked for a pool that Dems ang GOPs built up. Because each would be terrified of the others' most partisan candidated winning, they might agree to pick rational centrists. There is a germ of a solution to activist appointments here. Since each side can so hold up the other, we have essentially deadlock. Think about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-02-04 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Interesting approach.
At first blush, I can't find anything wrong with it.
Welcome to DU.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep 07th 2024, 08:08 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

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