Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Arguendo

I would agree that this must be BS but it does seem strange that the SC hasn’t apparently taken any of these cases seriously. You’d think that in a gesture of openness and honesty that BO would disclose his real BC rather than hire lawyers to keep it sealed.

Wonder what Laura Ingraham has to say about this....she worked at the SC.


6 posted on 01/25/2009 8:48:21 PM PST by Aria ("An America that could elect Sarah Palin might still save itself." Vin Suprynowicz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Aria

I suspect that Laura might even have a hard time publicly risking much noise about this issue under serious threat if she does.


11 posted on 01/25/2009 8:54:13 PM PST by Quix (LEADRs SAY FRM 1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Aria

That would be interesting to hear. She probably has a better understanding of constitutional law than anyone on this board and no one questions her conservative credentials.


23 posted on 01/25/2009 9:43:10 PM PST by Arguendo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Aria; Arguendo

You said — “I would agree that this must be BS but it does seem strange that the SC hasn’t apparently taken any of these cases seriously.”

Well..., the way I see it, is that the Supreme Court doesn’t jump on legal matters simply because they are pressing in a popular or political sense, but only act when the legal issues become pressing to the Supreme Court, itself, in terms of its own criteria (of which they don’t make that known outside of themselves). Sometimes issues can be appealed for a period of decades and nothing will happen. Then, all of a sudden, a case will be taken and a judgment made on it (where it had not been touched for a long time before).

I would imagine that it could be that way now, too... The Supreme Court is not like contacting your Senator or Congressman, who have the next election to be concerned about. The Supreme Court doesn’t operate on that basis at all. And it was made that way, so don’t expect them to respond to political issues, because they seem pressing to certain voters. The Supreme Court seems to take a “long view” on a lot of issues, carrying on for decades before anything is done, if at all.

And then you said — “You’d think that in a gesture of openness and honesty that BO would disclose his real BC rather than hire lawyers to keep it sealed.”

Well, even though that was a slogan, no...., I wouldn’t expect it. It was simply political rhetoric (as usual, as it is with most politicians...).


71 posted on 01/26/2009 5:23:33 AM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson