Skip to comments.
SCOTUS requests Dem response to Frist filing.
Fox News
| 10/03/02
| copcyat
Posted on 10/03/2002 8:40:41 PM PDT by copycat
Just announced on Fox...SCOTUS has requested that the NJ Dems file a response to the filing presented earlier today by Sen Bill Frist, nead of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Does this make it more likely that the SCOTUS will accept the case, or is it just standard procedure?
TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-140 next last
1
posted on
10/03/2002 8:40:41 PM PDT
by
copycat
To: copycat
Excellent.
To: copycat
Bump. Why ask for a response if you are not considering taking this case?
3
posted on
10/03/2002 8:41:28 PM PDT
by
copycat
To: copycat
Sounds good to me. Why would they ask the Dems for a brief unless they were at least considering taking it?
4
posted on
10/03/2002 8:42:26 PM PDT
by
Cicero
To: copycat
I dont know that the request is standard, but I do believe it represents some serious interest by the SCOTUS...JFK
To: BADROTOFINGER
Bump
6
posted on
10/03/2002 8:43:47 PM PDT
by
fatima
To: Cicero
Hoping for someone with knowledge of SCOTUS procedures to shed some light on this. Seems like a positive development.
7
posted on
10/03/2002 8:44:42 PM PDT
by
copycat
To: copycat
bump
8
posted on
10/03/2002 8:45:11 PM PDT
by
deport
To: fatima
Quiters never win and winners never quit. Torch should have gone the distance.
To: BADROTOFINGER
No sign of a stay from Souter yet. I think if the court will take the case, a stay must be issued ASAP to avoid ballot probs.
10
posted on
10/03/2002 8:45:45 PM PDT
by
copycat
To: copycat
bump
To: deport
SCOTUS Smackdown Part II.
12
posted on
10/03/2002 8:46:01 PM PDT
by
dfwgator
To: copycat
If the SCOTUS had no intention of taking the case, they would need no rebuttal to the request. But it doesn't make hearing the case a cinch. When an appeal is sent regarding a death penalty case, for instance, the state in which the execution is to occur must give cross filing, rebuttal/defense.
13
posted on
10/03/2002 8:47:11 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
To: MHGinTN
14
posted on
10/03/2002 8:48:33 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
To: gov_bean_ counter
My guess is that Torrecelli did not have a choice. Remember, he is known as the deal maker. I believe that the deal was that the DNC would back him as long as his poll numbers were positive. No one counted on the numbers tanking so late in the game.
15
posted on
10/03/2002 8:49:00 PM PDT
by
Eva
To: copycat
They are going to look at both sides no matter what. Despite the propaganda they will examine both sides of the issue before making any moves. I don't think this is a sign either way.
16
posted on
10/03/2002 8:49:37 PM PDT
by
Arkinsaw
To: copycat
Any legal eagle out there... please shed some light on this. Just heard something on a local talk show that this case doesn't have a strong federal statute for the SCOTUS to take on?
17
posted on
10/03/2002 8:49:50 PM PDT
by
Toidylop
To: Torie; Howlin
over here
18
posted on
10/03/2002 8:50:06 PM PDT
by
marajade
To: copycat
Actually, while a fast stay may stave off ballot problems, I would just as soon see the Dems spend some of that $800,000 on ballots that they have to discard! :)
To: Torie
Is this request a routine procedure? Or do you know?
20
posted on
10/03/2002 8:50:44 PM PDT
by
deport
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-140 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson