Ask Michael Burke Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (85817)	11/23/2000 2:22:59 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) of 132070

The party that appoints members of the court will tend to appoint judges whose interpretation of the law and other controversial items is similar to their own. (similar philosophies) For sure. I was just trying to draw the distinction between having a similar philosophy and being a political hack, angling for a particular candidate's victory. I am not a lawyer, but there are clearly a bunch of contradictory statutes regarding manual recounts that the judges aimed to interpret. I hope we get a more balanced view from the Supreme Court whichever way it goes What I keep hearing is that due to the more conservative makeup of the Supreme Court, they are unlikely to intervene in a matter that has traditionally been under the jurisdiction of the states. What is the federal issue involved here?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next