Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Zeev's Turnips -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (321)	12/10/2000 9:37:32 AM
From: Carl R.	Respond to of 644

I agree, Zeev. As I have said I am not at all clear what precedents exist in those cases nor how to resolve them. If Wells decides that Florida Law requires them to be thrown out, then so be it. My fear is some sort of knee-jerk reaction by some of the other justices on the FSC, not Wells who has shown that he is both impartial, and has a sense of the importance of his position. The primary reason I posted the Wells decision is because he anticipates the USSC overturning the decision, and Bosco had asked on what grounds they would do so. At this point I have no doubt that the USSC will overturn the FSC - obviously they have a 5-4 majority already. Can they reach another unanimous decision? Or will they split along partisan lines? I would think all nine members of the USSC would have enough respect for the importance of their role that they would try to be non-partisan but without getting inside their heads we will never know. I question the wisdom of their continuing involvement in this case because I would hate to see people begin to think of them as a political body instead of an independent one. The FSC has already cost itself a tremendous amount of respect, and I would hate to see that happen to the USSC. Allowing even a very questionable decision to stand would be better than that, because after all it really won't make much difference in the long run who is president for the next four years, a very short period in the context of our history. The justices are smart people, though, and they surprised me once with a creative, unanimous decision, so maybe they can do it again. And then back to your original question, what happens if the FSC overturns Lewis and Clark? Will there be any Federal questions that would justify that case to be appealed to the USSC? I have no idea, frankly. I have no more idea what legal issues and precedents exist at a Federal level than I do at as to issues at the state level. Carl

To: Zeev Hed who wrote (321)	12/10/2000 1:03:30 PM
From: Carl R.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 644

Zeev, allow me to add that the rationale for affirming Saul at the FSC level is much stronger than the rationale for overturning it at the USSC level, and I am not convinced that the legal arguments at the Federal level are particularly strong. The state supreme court has a right to be the final authority as to their own laws. Thus even if the statute says "shall", they can read "shall not" if they want to. For the USSC to overturn that, they have to determine that the courts usurped the power of the legislature, and to do that they really have to look at the meaning of the state law and decide that the state court was wrong in its interpretation. Thus I am uncomfortable with seeing this case at the USSC level. Carl