Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
9/23/2020 3:47:02 PM
Posted: 10/16/2008 7:09:48 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:12:21 AM EDT
That fool needs to be put in her damned place.
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:15:19 AM EDT
What is she thinking?

Oh, I know.... " Fair and honest election, Not here."

Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:16:33 AM EDT
Details?
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:16:49 AM EDT
If anyone ever had any doubts as to the pure partizanship, and total lack of judicial focus on the part of Stevens, him agreeing to hear this case can certainly put that doubt to rest.

Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:19:29 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:21:15 AM EDT
So how does this process work?

Will he be the only one to rule on the issue?

How did he get it?

Could it have gone to another Justice?

Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:22:16 AM EDT
I made mention of it in Naked Gunmans thread this morning.

583
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:23:53 AM EDT
www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/10/16/brunnerappeal.html?sid=101


Brunner appeals case involving new voter registrations

Thursday,  October 16, 2008 8:13 AM
By Mark Niquette
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH


Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner has appealed a case involving verifying new voter registrations to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Brunner said an appeal of a 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling was filed late last night directly with Justice John Paul Stevens because he oversees the 6th Circuit.

The request, filed by the Ohio attorney general's office, seeks an emergency ruling and "urgently asks this court to restore order to Ohio's election, which was destabilized" by the appeals court ruling.

The case involves what should be done when addresses or other personal information from newly registered voters doesn't match the data for them on file with state motor vehicle and federal Social Security records.

By federal law, the new voter information automatically is checked by computer against the state and federal databases and any mismatches are identified.

Brunner has said as many as many as 200,000 of the 666,000 new registrants this year could have mismatches.

The Ohio Republican Party sued Brunner in federal court, arguing that a list of voters whose information didn't match should be provided to county elections boards to clear up any discrepancies and weed out any fraud.

Elections officials in many counties said they are only able to access the mismatches by examining voter records one by one.

U.S. District Court Judge George C. Smith granted a temporary order last week ordering Brunner to give the counties lists of new voter names with mismatches since Jan. 1. A three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit halted that order, but the full 6th Circuit overturned that ruling and told Brunner to provide the information.

Brunner said this morning the grounds for the appeal include that the database she inherited has been in place for two years and that any major changes now with the Nov. 4 election looming could disrupt the system.

She said attempts still are being made to provide the data but that there appears to be problems with the way the databases were constructed.

Kevin DeWine, the deputy chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, sent out a fund-raising appeal by e-mail early this morning announcing the appeal and seeking an additional $100,000 to replenish the party's legal defense fund.

"This appeal is stunning in its attempt to defy the law and conceal the fraud in this election," DeWine wrote.

Brunner has noted that many mismatches could be for typos and may already have been cleared up by county elections boards.
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:24:07 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:25:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By skygod:
So how does this process work?

Will he be the only one to rule on the issue?

How did he get it?

Could it have gone to another Justice?



He can reject it, he can pass it to the full court, he can issue a TRO pending the full court I believe.  I don't think he can order overturn the appeals court ruling on his own.  Waiting for the lawyers to chime in.


So how is it that Steves has this case?  Was he in a rotation?

Did he step up and choose to hear it?
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:26:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By ARsonist:
That fool needs to be put in her damned place.



If by "in her damned place", you mean "at the end of a rope", then yeah - I agree...



 - georgestrings
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:29:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By skygod:

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By skygod:
So how does this process work?

Will he be the only one to rule on the issue?

How did he get it?

Could it have gone to another Justice?



He can reject it, he can pass it to the full court, he can issue a TRO pending the full court I believe.  I don't think he can order overturn the appeals court ruling on his own.  Waiting for the lawyers to chime in.


So how is it that Steves has this case?  Was he in a rotation?

Did he step up and choose to hear it?


Brunner said an appeal of a 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling was filed late last night directly with Justice John Paul Stevens because he oversees the 6th Circuit.
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:30:48 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Cpt_Kirks:

Originally Posted By skygod:

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By skygod:
So how does this process work?

Will he be the only one to rule on the issue?

How did he get it?

Could it have gone to another Justice?



He can reject it, he can pass it to the full court, he can issue a TRO pending the full court I believe.  I don't think he can order overturn the appeals court ruling on his own.  Waiting for the lawyers to chime in.


So how is it that Steves has this case?  Was he in a rotation?

Did he step up and choose to hear it?


Brunner said an appeal of a 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling was filed late last night directly with Justice John Paul Stevens because he oversees the 6th Circuit.


Ahh, I see.  Thanks.

Now on to the important question (with minor tin-foil):

Is this is coincidence or not?

Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:33:30 AM EDT

I was waiting for you to post the thread.  


Seriously.
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:33:34 AM EDT
It is just a STALLING TACTIC to NOT IMPLEMENT till after the ELECTION. They will prevail till after the election. You watch. The work the system and we cry abou it.
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:42:42 AM EDT
From SCOTUSblog:

Justice Stevens may act without asking state GOP officials to respond, or wait until there is a response.  He also has the option of sharing a decision with his Court colleagues, or acting alone.


Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:43:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 7:47:36 AM EDT
If Judge Stevens acts alone on this I'll be very surprised.  This is not a minor matter.  


Reading the Scotus Blog again brings back some Heller memories.  
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 8:04:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/16/2008 8:07:04 AM EDT by JHMC79]

Originally Posted By whoanelly:
If Judge Stevens acts alone on this I'll be very surprised.  This is not a minor matter.  


Reading the Scotus Blog again brings back some Heller memories.  



That son of bitch is going to sit on it until after the election.

By taking no action, he is in effect overturning the lower courts ruling by delaying it until it doesn't matter.



If he does pass it along to the whole court in a timely manner, I'll eat my words, but I highly doubt I have to worry about it.

Link Posted: 10/16/2008 8:07:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 8:10:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By JHMC79:

Originally Posted By whoanelly:
If Judge Stevens acts alone on this I'll be very surprised.  This is not a minor matter.  


Reading the Scotus Blog again brings back some Heller memories.  



That son of bitch is going to sit on it until after the election.

By taking no action, he is in effect overturning the lower courts ruling by delaying it until it doesn't matter.



If he does pass it along to the whole court in a timely manner, I'll eat my words, but I highly doubt I have to worry about it.



Just so my addled brain follows this correctly, by taking no action he is tacitly siding with the full 6th Circuit correct?


I'm no lawyer, but that's how I read it. The application filed is for a stay, so wouldn't that be like a stay of execution where if the court doesn't intervene the execution goes ahead as planned?
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 8:10:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JHMC79:

Originally Posted By whoanelly:
If Judge Stevens acts alone on this I'll be very surprised.  This is not a minor matter.  


Reading the Scotus Blog again brings back some Heller memories.  



That son of bitch is going to sit on it until after the election.

By taking no action, he is in effect overturning the lower courts ruling by delaying it until it doesn't matter.



If he does pass it along to the whole court in a timely manner, I'll eat my words, but I highly doubt I have to worry about it.



If he sits on it we win.  The democrats appealed which means that the 6th Circuit ruled in our favor.  
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 8:13:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/16/2008 8:17:33 AM EDT by JHMC79]

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By JHMC79:

Originally Posted By whoanelly:
If Judge Stevens acts alone on this I'll be very surprised.  This is not a minor matter.  


Reading the Scotus Blog again brings back some Heller memories.  



That son of bitch is going to sit on it until after the election.

By taking no action, he is in effect overturning the lower courts ruling by delaying it until it doesn't matter.



If he does pass it along to the whole court in a timely manner, I'll eat my words, but I highly doubt I have to worry about it.



Just so my addled brain follows this correctly, by taking no action he is tacitly siding with the full 6th Circuit correct?



I don't think so.

Stevens has agreed to hear the appeal, therefore the ruling in which the full 6th circuit issued is on standby until he does something with it.

ETA:  Perhaps I'm totally wrong on this, but I just don't see why Brunner would ask for and Stevens would agree to hear the appeal unless they thought it could benefit O'bamas chances of winning.



Link Posted: 10/16/2008 8:15:14 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 8:38:56 AM EDT
Treason = ?
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 5:40:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
if somebody reading this thread is a lawyer could you please do a little digging, report back and identify yourself as a lawyer please.


I'm a lawyer.  O'Reilly explained this on the radio.  The Sixth Circuit sided against the democrats.  However, as this is out of the Sixth Circuit Justice Stevens is in charge of the case and he will decide whether to issue a stay of the Sixth Circuit's order to give the necessary information to polling officials.

So if Stevens doesn't stay the matter, then we win unless the Supreme Court has an emergency hearing and decides the matter prior to the election results being final.
Link Posted: 10/16/2008 6:42:51 PM EDT
For Stevens, it's payback time for Al Gore.
Checkmate.  ACORN wins.  Obama wins.
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:35:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JHMC79:

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By JHMC79:

Originally Posted By whoanelly:
If Judge Stevens acts alone on this I'll be very surprised.  This is not a minor matter.  


Reading the Scotus Blog again brings back some Heller memories.  



That son of bitch is going to sit on it until after the election.

By taking no action, he is in effect overturning the lower courts ruling by delaying it until it doesn't matter.



If he does pass it along to the whole court in a timely manner, I'll eat my words, but I highly doubt I have to worry about it.



Just so my addled brain follows this correctly, by taking no action he is tacitly siding with the full 6th Circuit correct?



I don't think so.

Stevens has agreed to hear the appeal, therefore the ruling in which the full 6th circuit issued is on standby until he does something with it.

ETA:  Perhaps I'm totally wrong on this, but I just don't see why Brunner would ask for and Stevens would agree to hear the appeal unless they thought it could benefit O'bamas chances of winning.






I was wrong.

The 6th circuit ruling stands and Brunner must do as she's told unless Stevens acts quickly.

The way I understand it, Ohio has until the end of the day to comply with the ruling.

Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:51:27 AM EDT




I was wrong.

The 6th circuit ruling stands and Brunner must do as she's told unless Stevens acts quickly.

The way I understand it, Ohio has until the end of the day to comply with the ruling.



The end of today correct?

And what is happening in the other cities where ACORN is being investigated?  Anyone know?
Top Top