9th Circuit Delays California Recall

[lawrocket 3]

The 9th Circuit is at it again and doing it's best.

We'll keep track of these developments, and wonder whether the US Supreme court will have a say in this anytime very, very soon.

It seems to me that the antiquated voting machines, if they are prone to error, clearly mean that the initial election of Gray Davis was incorrect. Therefore, I think the last election (and every other election in California History) should be rescinded by this court, in its wisdom.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[TheAnvil 0]

You're asking the 9th to think logically? Whatever drugs you've been taking, stay off 'em!

The courts are where the lefties have won most of their major battles over the last few years. Hence their virulent opposition to any nominee to the federal bench who disagrees with their logically untenable positions.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

The courts are where the lefties have won most of their major battles over the last few years.

Like the 2000 presidential election?

[storm1977 0]

What r u talking about?

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[lummy 4]

The 9th circuit delayed their ruling for a week to allow the Supreme Court to hear the Appeal

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Like the 2000 presidential election?

Yep. In what other way would a state supreme court actually re-write a section of the state code. The FL Supreme Court actually re-wrote a law!!! Yes, they legislated! Yes, they actually said to themselves, "Hmmm. This law doesn't work out in Al Gore's favor. Well, we don't want to strike the law down, because that would look bad. What if we re-wrote the law. Forget about the balance of powers doctrine."

So, the US Supreme Court stepped in and said, "Wait a second, here. You can't re-write laws. Legislatures write laws. You are the Court, and the Court interprets laws."

So, I guess that you could say that the Republicans won a battle in the 2000 election. One that they shouldn't have had to fight in the first place if the FL Supreme Court had merely done it's job instead of the legislature's job.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[PhillyKev 0]

Not disagreeing at all. But how is that the lefties winning in the courts?

[lawrocket 3]

Okay, I'll limit it.

9th Circuit. Most of the nation thinks California is just a large group of liberal weirdos. The 9th Circuit demonstrates it often.

I'll try to list mny examples when I can get around to it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Most of the nation thinks California is just a large group of liberal weirdos.

Wait, are you saying they're not?

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[PhillyKev 0]

And actually, according to that article the reason they postponed the recall vote is because it would utilize punch cards. Which is specifically addressed by the US Supreme Court decision in relation to Florida.

[TaeKwonDoDo 0]

Quote

... the antiquated voting machines, if they are prone to error, clearly mean that the initial election of Gray Davis was incorrect.

To strengthen your point - I live in Santa Clara County and used one of those punch-card machines in the election in which Davis was re-elected.

I think I want a re-count of THAT vote.

- Jeff

"That's not flying, it's falling with style."

[lummy 4]

Quote

9th Circuit. Most of the nation thinks California is just a large group of liberal weirdos. The 9th Circuit demonstrates it often.

Could someone PLEASE explain to me how the two are related other than the fact that the 9th Circuit is located in San Francisco?

the Circuit court is appointed by the president and confirmed by congress... If you want to blame someone for putting a bunch of liberals on the bench, look there first please...

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[Michele 1]

LOL, I used one of those punch cards. I wasn't disenfranchised. My vote counted. I'm not a minority. My county is a large county. I had no trouble with the ballot. Hrm...

Just FYI, the 9th circuit court is the most over-ruled court, according to MSNBC, in the US.

Ciels-
Michele

~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

[billvon 3,031]

My prediction - the verdict will be overturned, the vote will proceed, and by Oct 7th everyone will be so sick of the show that the recall will not succeed.

[TaeKwonDoDo 0]

I triple checked for hanging and/or dimpled chads... I knew better (this time ).

To think that anyone could phuck one of those up after what happened in Florida... Well, if they are capable of phucking up their chads, then they shouldn't be voting .

- Jeff

"That's not flying, it's falling with style."

[lawrocket 3]

This is true. But one should consider the makeup of this particular Court.

First, the 9th Circuit is heavily dominated by Democratic appointees. The 3-judge panel hearing this case fit that mold.

1. Richard Paez - Clinton appointee, 2000. (took 4 years to confirm this guy, which I'll admit sucks).
2. Sydey Thomas - Clinton appointee, nominated 1995.
3. Harry Pregerson - Carter appointee, 1979. (Notable for dissenting in a case - Gretzler v. Stewart - for thinking that when a man is in a self-induced amphetamine and LSD laced psychosis, that specific intent to murder and terrorize 17 people in several states cannot be found)

In short, the ballot didn't stand a chance when the case drew these judges....

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lummy 4]

Quote

My prediction - the verdict will be overturned, the vote will proceed, and by Oct 7th everyone will be so sick of the show that the recall will not succeed.

That's what I'm hoping for as well.. At the very least, I hope they put it back on for Oct and get this over with since the ball's already rolling. I do think that they should have scheduled it with the next general election but that's a moot point and now just want to it to be done and over with.
Like I've stated elsewhere, I'm also concerned that RECALLS will become the norm if this does go thru. Then again, everyone will just look at the next recall election as them CRAZY Californian's are at it AGAIN...

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[TheBachelor 5]

I hope this is overturned so we can just get this over with. If not, we'll sit and talk about it until sometime next year when all of the voting sites are in compliance.

There are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years...

[storm1977 0]

Didn't the ACLU already go to court as far as the Balloting system was concerned. Didn't the courts rule in their favor and say that the system needed to be updated by 2004?

So, then the ACLU was happy. Now, that there is a chance a Rep may get in office in Cali, the ACLU is freaking out and wants this stopped, so they are going back to court to say Wait!!!! we need this changed before 2004

What are the Fucking odds that if it was a recall of a republican and it looked like a Democrat may win, that the ACLU would step in and try to postpone the election??????

Chris

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[PhillyKev 0]

So, it's ok when the US supreme court upholds a law that ensures Bush's presidency, but when one of the circuit courts bases a decision on that Supreme Court case, that's wrong?

Hey, I could care less either way. I don't know anything about Gray, and I've voted for just as many republicans as democrats. I just hate double standards.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

In short, the ballot didn't stand a chance when the case drew these judges....

Since you are the local legal eagle.. could you tell us when and who appointed the current Supreme Court of the United States?

Particular emphasis to be placed on republican appointees to the court... for balance mind you.

Amazon

[lawrocket 3]

Sure. Here you go:

1) Chief Justice Rehnquist. Appointed 1972 by Nixon. Appointed Chief Justice by Reagan 1986.

2) John Paul Stevens. Appointed 1975 by Gerald Ford.

3) Sandra Day O'Connor. Appointed 1981 by Reagan,

4) Antonin Scalia. Appointed 1986 by Reagan.

5) Anthony Kennedy. Appointed 1988 by Reagan.

6) David Souter. Appointed 1990 by Bush, Sr.

7) Clarence Thomas. Appointed 1991 by Bush, Sr.

8) Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Appointed 1993 by Clinton.

9) Steven Breyer. Appointed 1994 by Bill Clinton.

There you go. 7 of 9 are Republican appointees. It's nice to know that Republican nominees are such a hodgepodge. As libertarian as Thomas and Scalia are, you'll get the liberality of Stevens and Souter and the swing vote of O'Connor.

Heck, even Rehnquist found that, even though there is nothing in the Constitution requiring a Miranda warning, it's gotta be Constitutional because it has become so accepted over the last 30 years. How's that for dangerous thought?

My wife is hotter than your wife.