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.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: t2 who wrote (17020)	2/27/1999 12:11:00 PM
From: RTev	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

I wonder if the same rules apply to the appeals court--we will see the same panel who overturned the last decision. I don't think so. Luck of the draw, as I understand it. The three judges will be drawn from the 50ish-judge bench, but even if it were the same three judges, any appeal decision would likely be appealed en banc -- to the whole bench -- where, according to a couple of recent stories, the antitrust bulls (as it were) and bears are evenly split. Another point: Remember that Jackson is one of the notorious "Reagan judge", one of the men (almost entirely men, as it happened) who were chosen mainly because they passed a strict "conservative litmus test". Unfortunately, many of them would have had a hard time passing an equally strict "judicial litmus test" had it been applied. Profiles indicate that there was never a doubt that Jackson passed the first test, but that there is some debate about how well he would have done on the second one. A decision either way will surely be appealed unless some kind of settlement is reached.