SCOTUS refuses almost all appeals.
You really have to have a good case and even then you might not get heard.
That’s why the under courts are the real power.
Biden filling vacancies as we speak.
Allan
When SCOTUS doesn’t take a case. That case is settled as the circuit court decided or it is remanded back to follow a previous SCOTUS opinion.
Allan
Yesterday’s orders
One case taken. 187 were denied.
Allan
Meet the newest SCOTUS justice when a vacancy arises.
Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Allan
They need to tell us why they refuse a case.
They already do.
No important federal question.
They only take cases in which an important federal question needs answering.
The case they did take was a 6th amendment case.
“The question that the justices agreed to decide is whether Hemphill “opened the door” at his trial to the use of evidence that would normally be barred by the Confrontation Clause.”
Allan
I wonder if Cons were just as as outraged when Florida purged convicted felons from the voter rolls and not allowing them to exercise their rights …especially in 2000…
in many cases its the vehicle, perhaps there were not good cases for them to make a statement on. i don’t know.
felons have no right to vote in FL until they’ve satisfied all of the provisions of their sentencing. aside from that, being purged does not prevent you from re-registering.
1 Like
We are not talking about doing time, we are talking about loss of a constitutional right. Please explain the logic of denying someone from owning a gun because they got a DUI, lied on their tax returns or sold bootleg tapes? The Constitution prohibits cruel, unusual or disproportional punishments for crimes. Loss of a Constitutional right for any of those offensives is an extreme example of disproportional punishment.
1 Like
Glad that you agree that the 2nd Amendment is in full force … and so is the fifth and eighth.
That’s part of the time. Just like voting.
Allan
It’s disproportional punishment … i.e. unconstitutional.
The bootleg tapes makes no sense. Nor does the tax returns.
DUI…I don’t know…speaks to someone’s sense of responibility.
But as we all are, I am shaped by my life’s experience.
When I was young, like 10, in our sleepy little town, in our local bar, a guy was flagged for being drunk. He drove home, got a rifle, came back to the bar and shot the bartender in the head killing him.
Just so ■■■■■■■ awful. And you know, if that guy didn’t have easy access to a gun…the bartender is alive today, and he’s not rotting in jail.
Now, I don’t know if the guy was a drunk, or had DUIs. I do remember he was a member of a prominent local family. I forget if his dad was a local doc, or vet, or owned a car dealership… or something…can’t quite remember his name.
But booze and guns aren’t a good combo.
Does a DUI raise things to a level that a right should be stripped…maybe not one. But maybe a few? I don’t know…
Maybe it should be one. DUIs should be taken more seriously in America.
Selling bootleg Grateful Dead tapes? C’mon man.
Good … at least I got you thinking.
I completely agree. The debt has been paid, no reason not to.
4 Likes
Yes … with the caveat that if they are too dangerous to be allowed to be armed, they are too dangerous to let out of prison.
Yes that is the logical conclusion. Which may have an indirect negative impact on sentencing guidelines
Cruel and unusual I think not.
Allan
