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

Skip to comments.

MSNBC- Recall election to be delayed
Pete Williams MSNBC ^ | Pete Williams

Posted on 09/15/2003 10:18:32 AM PDT by Ragirl

California Appeals Court - Recall should be blocked!!!

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: 2003election; 9thcircuit; 9thcircuitcourt; circus; circustent; davisrecalleelection; democrap; dirtytricks; election2003; floriduhagain; graydavis; impeachthe9th; outofcontrol; recall; thefixisin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 251-300301-350351-400 ... 801-811 next last
To: Ragirl
"Woo, hoo! I'll be famous until March! I get to sell more of my videos!" -- Mary Carey
301 posted on 09/15/2003 11:09:30 AM PDT by Revolting cat! (Boss, I forgot to bring my tag line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob; Sabertooth
Maybe you can help me here. Everyone is saying that if illegals get driver's licenses they will be able to vote. I have no doubt they will try, but isn't this illegal?. I mean, isn't there some provision in the constitution that one has to be a citizen in order to vote?
302 posted on 09/15/2003 11:09:42 AM PDT by Warren_Piece (Dont Panic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: bootless
May this backfire in their faces ten-fold.
303 posted on 09/15/2003 11:09:49 AM PDT by CounterCounterCulture (I have already previewed or do not wish to preview this composition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
If they calim to be based on Bush v Gore, it's a deliberately corrupted version of Bush v Gore, which recognized different voting procedures in different districts as valid parts of elections (viz Scalia concurrence).

In any case, the 202 election was valid but this cannot be - with the same equipment?

The 9th *knows* what they are doing is pulling it out of a hat. They are willing co-conspirators with the ACLU in defying democracy. par for the judicial activist course.
304 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:00 AM PDT by WOSG (Dont put Cali on CRUZ CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
I don't challenge your legal acumen, CBB. My thoughts are political. If SCOTUS overturns the 9th, this will give the Dems more ammo to whine, "there they go again", etc.. It's factually wrong of course but when did that matter?

OTOH, if the 9th ruling stands, roughly two-thirds of voting Californians will be PO'd and feel disenfranchised. The Dems will be the ones viewed as overturning the people's will. Davis will continue to mismanage the state, and the result will be an angry electorate in '04. Ah-nold's plastic candidacy will be less of a factor too.

So personally, ?i don't see this as a loss, JMO.
305 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:11 AM PDT by over3Owithabrain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
Does that make it harder for them to now take up a California election case when it refused to take up a New Jersey election case?

In the New Jersey race, the Supreme Court refused to take the appeal (wrongly in my opinion) because the New Jersey State Supreme Court ruled on a State law issue.

In this case a Federal Court has ruled on the basis of a Federal issue (minority voting rights). Just because they didn't take the New Jersey case is no indication that they won't take the California case. Of course, it's no guarantee they will take it, either.

306 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:11 AM PDT by TontoKowalski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

Comment #307 Removed by Moderator

To: Keith
Keith, the USSC has appellate jurisdiction over both federal circuit courts of appeals and the 50 state supreme courts -- Article III of the US Constitution.

That does not mean they will hear this case or take any other action, it just means that they have jurisdiction.
308 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:22 AM PDT by mwl1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: The KG9 Kid
JELLO BIAFRA - the government is evil, big corporations are evil, the main stream media is evil, democrats are evil, republicans are even more evil, our capitalist society is evil, the Green Party is the only way, and a socialist form of government is the only way. Jello is as left wing as Pat Buchanan is right wing.

Jello and the DK's were fun and irreverent when I was a teenager, but they are actually quite silly now.
309 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:30 AM PDT by Weimdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too
One difference from New Jersey is that it was the New Jersey Supreme Court interpreting a New Jersey statute -- typically state courts are viewed as the highest authority in interpreting state law. No USSC jurisdiction unless federal constitutional law issue.

Here, the 9th Circuit delayed the recall based based on federal constitutional law -- equal protection/due process.

310 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:43 AM PDT by writmeister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: Ragirl
SAN FRANCISCO (CNN) --"A federal appeals court has blocked the Oct. 7 California recall, but stayed its order for seven days to allow an appeal. The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals follows a hearing last week in which the American Civil Liberties Union sought a postponment of the vote. The ACLU argued that election officials should have more time to replace antiquated voting machines in several California counties."
311 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:56 AM PDT by veronica (http://www.PetitionOnline.com/bombings/petition.html - Homicide bombings = war crimes - sign this!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
Thanks, John. 'Tis good to have someone who has done this before around these parts (compared to someone who merely knows most of the motions like FoxNews).
312 posted on 09/15/2003 11:10:56 AM PDT by steveegg (I have one thing to say to the big spenders; BLIZZARD OF RECALL TOUR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: A_Niceguy_in_CA
Didn't the people of California vote to have this recall? So, the 9th is actually overturning the popular vote to have the recall and at the same time is ruling to prevent another lawful election? It's despicable. Shame.
313 posted on 09/15/2003 11:11:17 AM PDT by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Peach
"They refused to take the New Jersey case with Torrecelli saying it was a state's issue."

And this is why I believe they will take the case the 9th is a fedreal court while this is a state issue.
314 posted on 09/15/2003 11:11:21 AM PDT by Kadric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
No, the issues in this case have nothing to do with the issues in Bush v. Gore. And I say that as a lawyer who filed one of the winning briefs in the first Bush case.

John / Billybob

315 posted on 09/15/2003 11:11:22 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Everyone talks about Congress; I am doing something about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: flamefront
"As Rush L. just pointed out the SCOTUS last avoided state election issues as they came up in the Torricelli race. "

Yeah, but that was a NJ Supreme Court ... here it's a federal court doing the dirty deed. Wholly Federal issues, cannot be ducked.
316 posted on 09/15/2003 11:11:23 AM PDT by WOSG (Dont put Cali on CRUZ CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Warren_Piece
well, yes, you have to be a citizen to vote, but one can easily register without anyone knowing...

it is illegal to sneak into the country too....
317 posted on 09/15/2003 11:11:26 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: A Citizen Reporter
Brit can talk all he wants about the court isn't supposed to determine the "public interest" but it won't do any good. The courts have totally become about determining the public interest versus interpreting the law. Those days are long gone, I'm afraid.
318 posted on 09/15/2003 11:11:41 AM PDT by Wphile (Keep the UN out of Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: TheLooseThread
(from the removed thread: Not necessarily -
There is still time for Arnold and Tom to resolve things as it stood until today with three weeks left and they both have yet to be in a debate together.

Further the addition of the moter-votered Jan 1st drivers license registrations will add many to the Dems voter rolls.

Besides the goal of the leftists all along has been to diminish the energy of the recall campaign. Now they are succeeding.

Forget the strategery rationalization.

319 posted on 09/15/2003 11:12:09 AM PDT by flamefront (To the victor go the oils. No oil or oil-money for islamofascist weapons of mass annihilation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
TIME TO IMPEACH SOME JUDGES

anyone know the procedure for recalling judges?
320 posted on 09/15/2003 11:12:16 AM PDT by Republicus2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: flamefront
That ruling was in the context of a ruling by the New Jersey State Supreme Court, not a ruling by a Federal court.

The opinion is written from the context of the Federal Constitution trumphing the California State Constitution.

321 posted on 09/15/2003 11:12:26 AM PDT by tx_eggman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I live in South orange County, and have always voted punch card!
322 posted on 09/15/2003 11:12:34 AM PDT by woodyinscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: writmeister
This signals the death of a republican form of government, SCOTUS is not in session, this is an ACLU/Davis/Democrat putsch.

What needs to be done is for the 9th to go Reichstag.
323 posted on 09/15/2003 11:12:39 AM PDT by johnqueuepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: Dog
There's no legitimate oversight, imo, but the 14th amendment (which the North forced the South to ratify as one of the conditions to re-enter a union the North also says they never left) gives legal authority for federal intervention.
324 posted on 09/15/2003 11:13:15 AM PDT by Tree of Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
SCOTUS is in session. They heard the CFR case last week.
325 posted on 09/15/2003 11:13:30 AM PDT by writmeister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: Credo
FNC said the ruling from the 9th Circuit said something along the lines of "when other countries around the world are trying to have free and open elections, it would tip the scales to have the recall go forward."
326 posted on 09/15/2003 11:13:38 AM PDT by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: A_Niceguy_in_CA
How many judges on the 9th Circuit are Clinton appointees?

Rush just said that two of the judges who made this ruling are clinton appointees, and one was appointed by carter.

327 posted on 09/15/2003 11:13:38 AM PDT by snopercod (Awake! for Morning in the Bowl of Night Has flung the Stone that puts the Stars to Flight:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: steveegg
Nice try..

I am well-aware of the varying interpretations of Bush v Gore and have alluded to that in several ways [inconsistent lower court rulings; the novelty of the relevant case law]. Quite frankly, this is not a "nice try" rhetorical game... The Supreme Court will rule however it sees fit and playing volleyball over the details is a waste of energy. I stated by view which is consistent with that of many interpretations; yours is consistent with other interpretations and may prove more accurate.

In the end, the 'politics' of the Supreme Court will play just as much role as the particulars of the case law. Don't be surprised in the slightest if the SCOTUS issues a summary affirmation and skips this issue altogether. This Supreme Court has never evidenced the slightest hesitation to influence the political process, whether by action or by inaction as the case may be...

Remember all the oh-so-well-constructed word game arguments over why the Supreme Court was going to reverse the New Jersey court on the Torricelli-Lautenburg substitution? Odds favor the SCOTUS taking a pass. That's my final answer...

328 posted on 09/15/2003 11:13:48 AM PDT by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: A_Niceguy_in_CA
According to the Senate Judiciary website, 45 of 95 Bush judicial nominations have been confirmed.
329 posted on 09/15/2003 11:13:54 AM PDT by triplejake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman
Good point.
330 posted on 09/15/2003 11:13:58 AM PDT by flamefront (To the victor go the oils. No oil or oil-money for islamofascist weapons of mass annihilation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: johnqueuepublic
SCOTUS is in session. They came back early to hear the campaign finance reform suit.
331 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:02 AM PDT by Tree of Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: A Citizen Reporter
According to a reporter on Fox reading a quote from the ruling they even brought foreign policy into the ruling...

LOL!

332 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:03 AM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: Dog; Sabertooth
ACTIVE JUDGES OF THE 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

Note that Ramona Ripston, executive director of the ACLU of Southern California, is the wife of Justice Stephen Reinhardt.

NAME
RESIDENT
CHAMBERS
DATE OF
BIRTH
DATE OF APPOINTMENT
APPOINTED
BY
ACTIVE
Schroeder, Mary M., Chief Judge
Phoenix
12/04/40
09/26/79
Carter
Pregerson, Harry
Los Angeles
10/13/23
11/02/79
Carter
Reinhardt, Stephen
Los Angeles
03/27/31
09/11/80
Carter
Kozinski, Alex
Pasadena
07/23/50
11/07/85
Reagan
O'Scannlain, Diarmuid F.
Portland
03/28/37
09/26/86
Reagan
Trott, Stephen
Boise
12/12/39
03/25/88
Reagan
Rymer, Pamela Ann
Pasadena
11/06/41
05/22/89
Bush
Nelson, Thomas G.
Boise
11/14/36
10/17/90
Bush
Kleinfeld, Andrew J.
Fairbanks
06/12/45
09/16/91
Bush
Hawkins, Michael Daly
Phoenix
02/12/45
09/15/94
Clinton
Tashima, A. Wallace
Pasadena
06/24/34
01/04/96
Clinton
Thomas, Sidney R.
Billings
08/14/53
01/04/96
Clinton
Silverman, Barry G.
Phoenix
10/11/51
02/04/98
Clinton
Graber, Susan P.
Portland
07/05/49
03/19/98
Clinton
McKeown, M. Margaret
Seattle
05/11/51
04/08/98
Clinton
Wardlaw, Kim McLane
Pasadena
07/02/54
08/03/98
Clinton
Fletcher, William A.
San Francisco
06/06/45
10/09/98
Clinton
Fisher, Raymond C.
Pasadena
07/12/39
10/12/99
Clinton
Gould, Ronald M.
Seattle
10/17/46
11/22/99
Clinton
Paez, Richard A.
Pasadena
05/05/47
03/14/00
Clinton
Berzon, Marsha S.
San Francisco
04/17/45
03/16/00
Clinton
Tallman, Richard C.
Seattle
03/03/53
05/25/00
Clinton
Rawlinson, Johnnie B.
Las Vegas
12/16/52
07/26/00
Clinton
Clifton, Richard R.
Honolulu
11/13/50
07/30/02
Bush
Bybee, Jay S.
Washington, D.C.
10/27/53
03/21/03
Bush
Callahan, Consuelo M.
Sacramento
06/09/50
05/28/03
Bush

333 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:05 AM PDT by Wolfstar (NO SECURITY = NO ECONOMY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I'm not in California but our ballots would never be allowed based on this. There is no way the idiots in California and Florida could figure them out. The ballot and the card are not even connected, no lines directing you to which hole to punch...we don't even get a stylus anymore to punch the cards with and they stopped using the styrofoam backing years ago so now the chads always hang. You have to pull them off to insure that they won't effect the card when it's run through the machine.

What a frickin' mess. Thanks a lot Al Gore.

334 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:13 AM PDT by Wphile (Keep the UN out of Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: steveegg
The Nth Circus of leftweiny jerkoffs, strikes again.

Scotus will hammer them again. Scotus beats these drugged out pretenders like a drum several times each year. There isn't a single Nth Circus leftweiny worth the oxygen they breath in or the CO2 they breath out.

What happens is the California ACLU gets 3 of its perverts on on Nth Circus of leftweiny jerkoffs chosen to make a decision like this. Sometimes they use retired leftweiny jerkoffs like the aborted pledge of allegiance fiasco last year. They make these out rageous decisions, it makes the news as great news. Then, Scotus handles the situation and flushes the decision down where it belongs.
335 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:18 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (May our brave warriors kill all of the Islamokazis/facists/nazis to prevent future 9/11's.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci
According to the Supreme Court, it should be O'Conner:

Allotment of Justices

336 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:23 AM PDT by xrp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: Wright is right!
Good point about this being a federal decision already once the 9th Circuit got involved.
337 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:29 AM PDT by Peach (The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red
"I was able to vote with PUNCH CARDS without any difficulty.
"

Obviously you are a Republican then!
338 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:39 AM PDT by WOSG (Dont put Cali on CRUZ CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: BurbankKarl
Rush saying only the Dictators and the ACLU fear an election...

True. When they think they'll lose, they find something to litigate. They'll try to win through the courts, rather than state laws and the will of the voters there.
If anyone is denying the people their democracy, it's the liberal in California!

339 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:47 AM PDT by concerned about politics (Lucifers lefties are still stuck at the bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
This delay will insure the Davis recall, and the defeat of Bustamante.

The Democrats and the 9th Circuit have overplayed their hand.

It may ensure more than that. It may ensure the breakup of the Ninth Circus, and the breaking of the RAT filibusters of judges in the U.S. Senate.

340 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:48 AM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red
you are going to have to get rid of those before the next presidential election-or we will have to postpone the pres. election.....................
341 posted on 09/15/2003 11:14:48 AM PDT by Yup!!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: veronica
KNBC-TV/DT Los Angeles live streaming news coverage: http://nbc4la.feedroom.com/?fr_story=feb7990c1049e0e6507d91b69132c529554a9628
342 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:05 AM PDT by mhking (Laugh while you can, monkey boy...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: rintense
"The SCOTUS will deny hearing it I'll bet."

Can't the SCOTUS come out with a ruling that the 9th Circuit had no juridiction in this case involving a state election for a state official and vacate the 9th's ruling?

343 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:13 AM PDT by A_Niceguy_in_CA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: CoolGuyVic
This is actually good news.

First, someone will no doubt point out the parallels with Venezuela.

Second, the odd are that, either Davis will not be recalled, or, if his is, Bustaments will be elected.

Third, if Arnold is by a fluke elected, he will not be able to accomplish anything conservative in the teeth of an entrenched liberal establishment (Reagan to the contrary notwithstanding.) And Republicans will lose more credibility as California sinks deeper into the slough.

Fourth, Arnold is probably a limp-wristed conservative at best, absolutely liberal on social issues and unreliable on fiscal issues.

I would rather have the issue than a forlorn chance of having a RINO.
344 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:14 AM PDT by nathanbedford (qqua)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CounterCounterCulture
yes, that why its better to have this as an issue rather then have the SCOTUS overturn it and give the Dems an issue.

The NJ fiasco permanently destroyed McGreevey's poll numbers (in the 30s). This decision might allow CA to be competitive for Bush in 2004, and a possible defeat of Boxer (by Arnold, denied a shot at being governor by an activist liberal court). And, it could be useful to focus on illegal alien voting that is surely coming along with these licenses.

I say, let's play the political angle on this. Its California we are talking about, we have nothing to lose.
345 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:18 AM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
No, the issues in this case have nothing to do with the issues in Bush v. Gore. And I say that as a lawyer who filed one of the winning briefs in the first Bush case.

Congratulations. Filings and rulings have unintended consequences. You should know that. See my post #328.

346 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:19 AM PDT by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: Republicus2001
These are federal judges. They serve until retirement, death, or impeachment and removal by congress.
347 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:20 AM PDT by Tree of Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]

To: over3Owithabrain
If the SCOTUS refuses the case, then the 9th circuit has no business taking the case. Thus it has to be voided.
348 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:49 AM PDT by woodyinscc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Rush is DEAD WRONG on this. See my other posts on this thread. Also, as other posters have correctly noted, this does not involve a STATE court decision -- the California Supreme Court has already denied five different cases challenging this election. This time a FEDERAL court has stuck its nose into the people's business.

Bottom line: though the Torricelli non-decision by SCOTUS was an abomination, it is NOT relevant to the present situation.

John / Billybob

349 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:53 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Everyone talks about Congress; I am doing something about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Republicus2001
Federal judges can't get recalled. :(
350 posted on 09/15/2003 11:15:58 AM PDT by Dan from Michigan (There are two things in the middle of the road. Roadkill, and a yellow stripe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 320 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 251-300301-350351-400 ... 801-811 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