Appealing the NSA ruling? There is only so much time and so many cases the Supreme Court can hear each year. Is it right for the US govt to try and use that time to promote their own agendas?
2006-08-18 07:45:21 · 13 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
turbo, weren't you the one trying to get rid of appeals for death row cases? Funny...
2006-08-18 08:02:24 · update #1
neyjr, try to stay on task here, and attempt to answer the question.
2006-08-18 08:03:19 · update #2
Well it doesn't have to be that way, but when your goal is the destruction of the Constitution, as is Bush's goal, you feel it is.
2006-08-18 07:49:37 · answer #1 · answered by vertical732 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
The court hears only what it decides to hear, they could turn down every request if they want. Time is not a problem. the High Court will hear the case and they will side with Bush, because they are Conservative bias. Conservatives do not support the constitution, you will need to read the minority opinion for the truth. Look at Congress they only meet 45 days per year and get one million $ each.
Click on the link below and join my group.
2006-08-18 11:15:05 · answer #2 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Whaaaaat? That's a pretty lame question, even for you. :o
First, so that you might understand the US Federal court system, the appeals will go first to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The government, like any other entity, is entitled to appeal rulings in lower courts, especially over important Constitutional issues like this, which was treated in such a cavalier fashion by Judge Taylor. Wouldn't you want a deliberative, sober and considered approach to this issue?
2006-08-18 07:53:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
fisa has the authority to do all the listening it wants and supply the appropriate warrant in 30 days .SO i do not see why we have an issue at all .UN-LESS they are listeningto calls that do not have the slightest chance of being terror related .
FISH with a net drags everyone in and does not speack well of the agency doing such operations .
IT makes me wonder what is ddone with the thousnads of pages of transcripts they are storing and what this will do later .
THEY have nixon making some very racist remarks about minoritys and others and when i heard them i was shocked .THESE coments where so bad i will not put them here for anyone else to read .JUST take my word for it .SO bad think the worst and then go one step futher .THATS how bad it was .
I did not know people like that existed in the world .
2006-08-19 06:06:14 · answer #4 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, wouldn't it be so much better if we just let all the important constitutional decisions be made by liberal activist judges (the ones you would approve of, of course) and the conservative, constructionist judges kept there legal opinions to themselves. I doubt you would have made this lame point if it were a lower court decision with which you disagreed.
2006-08-18 13:24:23 · answer #5 · answered by Will 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's silly. But the point is as a power grab.
The judge just said that the program had to be conducted according to established laws. Everything under the program could have been done legally. Bush just didn't think that the laws should apply to him, so he ignored them
Bush wants the Supreme Court to say that it's OK for the administration to ignore the laws any time it claims national security reasons. It's purely a power grab.
2006-08-18 07:56:55 · answer #6 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
LOL absolutely. A left wing judge isn't about to dictate how the government determins to protect you.
I assume you have no trouble with the City of San Francisco paying its own lawyers to appeal decisions on gay marriage? And you probably have no issue with the State of Massachusettes trying to appeal decisions on how gas companies set their prices? No doubt you have no problems with these cases but one that goes against your special political interest and its wrong? Tough!
2006-08-18 07:53:13 · answer #7 · answered by netjr 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
That's what the courts are for.
Is it responsible for the ACLU to file so many lawsuits?
Is it responsible for the Ds to filibuster judge's nominations?
Is it responsible to complain about things that MIGHT happen, but haven't?
2006-08-18 08:58:02 · answer #8 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your right, no one should appeal and Roe v Wade was a waste of time by your logic. Hows the cool aid today?
2006-08-18 08:41:08 · answer #9 · answered by W E J 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush has to appeal, right now he has broke the law and needs his daddies buddies on the S.C. to get him off.
2006-08-18 07:54:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yeah it is.....I mean afterall, the ACLU "shopped" for their Carter-era appointee to get their ruling.
It might be moot anyway - it'll likely get appealed and the Carter-era judge's ruling might get thrown away anyways...
2006-08-18 07:52:23 · answer #11 · answered by B C 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋