Comments on: COURT ROUNDUP http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/court_roundup/ Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:00:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Paul http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/court_roundup/#comment-2521 Paul Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=2170#comment-2521 <i>.. by overturning a death sentence on grounds of an incompetent attorney. I'll have to read more on this one...</i> I think they got this one right... The guy's background was irrelevant to his guilt or innocence but it should have come up in sentencing. (so says even this hopeless right winger) <i>...struck down a California law that moves the statute of limitations </i> I was dumbfounded this was 5-4. Does their law dictionary not include the term "ex post facto." The court already screwed this up on the civil side. <i>In yet another 5-4 ruling, the Court allowed more tinkering with Congressional districts on racial grounds</i> Once again giving legal approval to descrimination and moving the supreme court to the role of nanny and not jurisprudence. (My laymans 2 cents.) .. by overturning a death sentence on grounds of an incompetent attorney. I'll have to read more on this one...

I think they got this one right... The guy's background was irrelevant to his guilt or innocence but it should have come up in sentencing. (so says even this hopeless right winger)

...struck down a California law that moves the statute of limitations

I was dumbfounded this was 5-4. Does their law dictionary not include the term "ex post facto." The court already screwed this up on the civil side.

In yet another 5-4 ruling, the Court allowed more tinkering with Congressional districts on racial grounds

Once again giving legal approval to descrimination and moving the supreme court to the role of nanny and not jurisprudence.

(My laymans 2 cents.)

]]> By: O. F. Jay http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/court_roundup/#comment-2522 O. F. Jay Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=2170#comment-2522 Do they ever vote on something big with a 9-0 for or against? Or must someone always be the brave dissenting voice? Do they ever vote on something big with a 9-0 for or against? Or must someone always be the brave dissenting voice?

]]> By: James Joyner http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/court_roundup/#comment-2523 James Joyner Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000 /?p=2170#comment-2523 Jay: They used to vote 9-0 routinely on the civil rights cases, but that has been a few decades. For the most part, cases difficult enough to make it to the Supremes tend to be 6-3 or 5-4. --- Jay: They used to vote 9-0 routinely on the civil rights cases, but that has been a few decades. For the most part, cases difficult enough to make it to the Supremes tend to be 6-3 or 5-4.

---

]]>