To: MHGinTN
I could be wrong on this Mike, but I don't believe the court can initiate any case. That would have to be done by the AG or one of the injured parties. It's good to see that Roe is taking it upon herself to get this going.
The dems have been using R v W to bash republican nominees over the head for the past decade and have really been using it lately. It would be truely funny if the court heard this on a fast-track basis and ruled immediately. It would completely take the wind out of the sails of the philibuster.
To: McGavin999; MHGinTN
I could be wrong on this Mike, but I don't believe the court can initiate any case. That would have to be done by the AG or one of the injured parties.Correct. The court itself does not have standing to do any such thing--and Thank God for that, because otherwise appellate courts would simply issue rulings on whatever wild hair got up their collective posteriors. Gay marriage could become mandatory.
100 posted on
06/17/2003 8:48:43 AM PDT by
Poohbah
(I must be all here, because I'm not all there!)
To: McGavin999
We don't stand a chance with O'Connor on the court.
181 posted on
06/17/2003 1:03:12 PM PDT by
rwfromkansas
("There is dust enough on some of your Bibles to write 'damnation' with your fingers." C.H. Spurgeon)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson