SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (95923)11/30/2000 3:54:08 PM
From: SecularBull  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 769670
 
Your logic is flawed. If the US SC determines that Florida's SC overstepped its bounds (which it did, imho), then to rule against the Florida SC is to uphold the power of the legislature and the executive branches of Florida's government. That is not a judicial activist stance, and is in fact consistent with conservative interpretation of judicial power (something which is apparently foreign to the half baked justices in Florida). Justices slapping down lower justices is not judicial activism on its face.

LoF



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (95923)11/30/2000 3:59:06 PM
From: Bill  Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 769670
 
Gore has one automatic vote, Ginsburg. I think it'll break 7-2 in favor of Bush.

Breyer - Gore
Ginsburg - Gore
Kennedy - Bush
O'Conner - Bush
Rehnquist - Bush
Scalia - Bush
Souter - Bush
Stevens - Bush
Thomas - Bush



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (95923)11/30/2000 4:21:33 PM
From: J.B.C.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
>>My prediction is a 6-3 decision in favor of Gore with Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas dissenting.<<

You mean THE Scalia and Thomas that AL slammed in his response during the debates about "we can't have anymore judges appointed like this....."

Bwaaaahahahahahahaha.

Wake up you're dreaming.

Jim