Politics for Pros- moderated 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 : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ilaine who wrote (105686)	3/24/2005 3:52:59 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) of 793698

I've been following the Schiavo discussion by flipping back and forth between CNN and Fox and just heard for the first time someone make the point that the federal courts have not ignored congress re the de novo hearing but rather that the attorneys for the parents had failed to put that in motion. This point that the attorneys "didn't make the best argument that they had" was made by Laurence Tribe. He went on to make the further point that the federal courts appropriately assumed for the purpose of the emergency order that the Schiavo law was constitutional but, before this de novo hearing could actually happen, a determination would need to be made that the law was constitutional and he thought it wouldn't be found constitutional so the de novo hearing would not happen in any case. He also said that de novo review doesn't necessarily mean reopening the whole inquiry but only that they could look at things without deference to what the state had done. Meanwhile, on that very same program, Greta Sustern's program, Hannity was still going on about how the federal courts were thumbing their noses at congress by ignoring the specification for a de novo hearing.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next