[grammymoon]

It seems strange not to be hearing ANYTHING.
I hope somebody gets it right in this. But Soulter?
nailbiting time

[copycat]

But Soulter?

Souter only rules, as the emergency judge, whether to issue an injunction to stop ballot printing until the court can decide. HE HAS NOT DONE SO, and instead he deferered the decision on the request for stay to the full court.

One could say as a left leaning judge that he is purposefully allowing the SCONJ decision to take root. I hope they're not printing ballots on the weekend.

They usually take 24-48 hours, so we should hear something today...(fingers crossed)

[Congressman Billybob]

Justice Souter is now out of the loop on the New Jersey case as the "Circuit Justice" for that state. The whole Court now has the case. If any five Justices decide to issue an injunction because the NJ SC violated the US Constitution by rewriting the NJ election laws, they will do so.

If there is going to be an immediate reversal and injunction, it will most likely come down TODAY. If nothing happens today, the Court almost never acts on Sunday. After that, it is Monday morning, or not at all.

Keep in mind that the US SC has one option the lamestream media have not considered. And it happens to be the one option which can get the needed long-term results of both controlling run-away state judges AND preventing the "go-to-court" backlash against Forrester. It is this:

The Court can deny the injunction and allow the NJ election to proceed. But it can hen decide in due time that the NJ SC was wrong, and lay down the law that ALL state courts must obey the Constitution (which the Constitution commits to the "legislatures," not to the "states" -- including their judges). That will leave a very messy problem if Lautenberg wins, but not if Forrester wins.

There is some truth in the turn-of-the-century comment of Mr. Dooley, a New York pol, "Th' Supreme Court follows th' illicition returns." The Court may reason politically, not judicially, and decide to hold off now but slam the NJ SC AFTER the election. That gives the best chance that Forrester will win. And that, in turn, defangs the claim that "The Supreme Court shouldn't decide elections."

The charge is baseless concerning 2000, since a bazillion recounts all showed that Bush won Florida, and therefore the election. But the charge cannot even be made if the Court holds off now about the New Jersey Supreme Court, but slams them after the election.

Congressman Billybob

Click for "Til Death Do Us Part."

Click for "to Restore Trust in America"

Click for "Death as a Political Strategy"