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

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Takes CFR Case
US Supreme Court ^ | 5 June 2003 | US Supreme Court

Posted on 06/05/2003 5:09:03 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob

At the end of the day today, the US Supreme Court accepted the CFR case (McConnell, et al). The Court will take the case early in its 2003 Term. It will come in a month early, 8 September, for a nearly unprecedented four hour argument.

Briefs by all plaintiffs in the trial court, including Senator McConnell and the NRA, must be filed by 8 July. Defendants below must file by 5 August. Reply briefs must be filed by 21 August.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: adban; bubyecfr; cfr; cfrlist; mccainfeingold; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: Recovering_Democrat
"Another note for all FREEPers who are Believers: Pray for the wisdom of our Justices and the continued health of particularly Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas."

There is one other justice I would like to nominate for that list: Anthony Kennedy. While he has not been as conservative as the three you mentioned, he is hardly a liberal. Also, I hope Sandra Day O'Conner lives a long life, but also decides to retire soon (within three years) so we can replace her with a solid conservative.

As to the liberal justices (anyone who considers Souter or Stevens a moderate is crazy) I also hope that they remain healthy (as a Christian there are few people I can wish ill upon, and those four are not on my list) but that they decide to retire, soon.
21 posted on 06/05/2003 5:50:59 PM PDT by MainstreamConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RJayneJ
I don't think there was any doubt about their taking it, given the way the lower court had ruled. As for their taking it on this expedited basis, I think that's largely a function of the nearness of the '04 election.
22 posted on 06/05/2003 5:55:11 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MainstreamConservative
I fear O'Connor's presence on the court is going to lead to some very fragmented opinions on this law from the Supreme Court.
23 posted on 06/05/2003 5:56:28 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

.
24 posted on 06/05/2003 5:59:55 PM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
The Nixon case was also granted expedited review, wasn't it? I seem to remember it being decided in mid-summer.

U.S. v. Nixon went by way of direct appeal to the Court, leapfrogging the Court of Appeals.

The Court heard oral arguments on July 8, 1974, and the decision was issued July 24, 1974.
25 posted on 06/05/2003 6:02:19 PM PDT by Mike Fieschko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Quix
C.F.R.

Campaign Finance Reform.
26 posted on 06/05/2003 6:13:20 PM PDT by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
Campaign Finance Reform.

LOL! I had no idea what that poster was talking about until I read your reply! What a riot!! (No offense to the original poster...maybe he/she was joking).

27 posted on 06/05/2003 6:18:18 PM PDT by cantfindagoodscreenname (You're unique--just like everyone else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
Hey, do you know the docket number?

Anyone ??

28 posted on 06/05/2003 6:22:16 PM PDT by MeekOneGOP (Bu-bye Dixie Chimps! / Check out my Freeper site !: http://home.attbi.com/~freeper/wsb/index.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RAT Patrol
Where is this editorial? I'd like to read it.

Thanks!

29 posted on 06/05/2003 6:35:39 PM PDT by UlmoLordOfWaters
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
Twelve consolidated appeals. Supreme Court has set up site for BIPARTISAN CAMPAIGN REFORM ACT CASES. Lead case No. 02-1674, McCONNELL, SENATOR, ET AL. V. FEC, ET AL.
30 posted on 06/05/2003 6:39:16 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
The Supreme Court Order noting "probable jurisdiction" gives the case numbers of all the lower court cases, but does not show the case number of the SC case. It has to be docketed, so it has to have a number, but I don't see it.

The case name is probably McConnell v. FEC since that's the first of the consolidated twelve different cases.

Billybob

31 posted on 06/05/2003 6:40:21 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob ("Saddam has left the building. Heck, the building has left the building.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
This is exactly what was expected. Hopefully, they will trash this puppy promptly. (maybe?)
32 posted on 06/05/2003 6:40:39 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
"I fear O'Connor's presence on the court is going to lead to some very fragmented opinions on this law from the Supreme Court."

Which is why I said in my earlier comment that I hope that O'Conner retires. If we can get one more solidly conservative justice, we can at last overturn Roe vs. Wade and end other unconstitutional practices.
33 posted on 06/05/2003 6:40:44 PM PDT by MainstreamConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Overtaxed
"Every time I see "CFR" I think of "Code of Federal Regulations." :)"

Me too, but I've finally adjusted to the true meaning:
------------------"Council on Foreign Relations."

34 posted on 06/05/2003 6:44:53 PM PDT by cookcounty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr
OH.

My bad.

Wellllllllll in a manner of speaking.
35 posted on 06/05/2003 6:48:15 PM PDT by Quix (HEBREW VOWEL ISSUE DISCUSSED, SCHOLARS N JUNE BCD search for TRUE HEAD TO HEAD COMPARISON CONTINUES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
Your FR profile page mentions a link to your Hoempage, where your articles can be found, but no such link seems to be present. Did it get lost in one of JohnRob's reconfigurations of FR technology?
36 posted on 06/05/2003 6:48:54 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Overtaxed
Get used to "BCRA" ("Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act"). It seems that's what the Supreme Court is going to call the act.
37 posted on 06/05/2003 6:50:12 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Constitution Day
Ping FYI!!!!
38 posted on 06/05/2003 7:28:58 PM PDT by mykdsmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UlmoLordOfWaters
Congressman Billybob's editorial
39 posted on 06/05/2003 7:40:19 PM PDT by RAT Patrol (Congress can give one American a dollar only by first taking it away from another American. -W.W.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
Great having you on FR. Any further ponderings on chances of a retirement this year?
40 posted on 06/05/2003 8:04:47 PM PDT by rwfromkansas (Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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