Messi scores on the rebound.
Founder of ESAS - Edgar Schiferli, the best associate bowler
A follower of the schools of Machiavelli, Bentham, Locke, Hobbes, Sutcliffe, Bradman, Lindwall, Miller, Hassett and Benaud
Member of JMAS, DMAS, FRAS and RTDAS
when you're winning, you have friends
scores and dozens, real friends
when you're winning, never lonely
when you keep winning
Colorado Springs cuts into services considered basic by many - The Denver Post
Libertarian fantasy coming true.
Indians can't bowl - Where has the rumour come from as I myself and many indian friends arwe competent fast bowlers ?
With the English bid I said: Let us be brief. If you give back the Falkland Islands, which belong to us, you will get my vote. They then became sad and left
How does that make sense since the 'dissent' takes shot at the majority opinion throughout, so if it was the majority opinion at one point, it doesn't read like it.
+ time's fickle card game ~ with you and i +
lool i haven't read the thing, but I've been catching up with the threads/articles I missed about, and this got posted the day or so after the verdict:
so I dunno, does that help you? it seems certain that Roberts switched, so from there this doesn't seem that out there, how quickly it's leaked is a bit werid. Clearly Scalia was pissed!From a cousin Who deals with federal court a lot, on FB:
Do any of my fellow lawyers share my suspicion that Chief Justice Roberts wrote both the majority opinion AND the principal dissent? (i.e., that he wrote the dissent, then changed his mind and wrote the majority opinion)? The bases for my suspicion: 1) the author of the dissent is not identified; 2) the dissent does not read like a Scalia dissent; 3) the dissent refers to Justice Ginberg's opinion as a dissent and, specifically, presumes she she dissenting to something in the (eventual) dissent, rather than to the majority opinion.
Of course there is a give and take before, so it's not implausible but it really doesn't seem like Roberts writing. Who knows though?
I think Robert did switch votes, but he assigned Kennedy to write the majority opinion. The reason being that Kennedy was not only the senior Justice, he was also considered the "swing" vote. Therefore it makes sense for Roberts to assign the majority opinion to him to say to the country "look even the moderate Justice didn't think this was constitutional".
What's really interesting to me is that once Roberts switched votes, the rest of the conservative justices turned on him. They started leaking to influential conservatives that someone was wavering due to Obama and the "liberal media" attacking the integrity of the court. In their dissenting opinion, they completely ignore Roberts and refuse to join him even in parts of his judgment they agree with. And finally we get all these detailed reports from sources that can only be one or more of the Justices themselves that Roberts switched votes and did so because of outside pressure. Roberts was once the darling of the right (remember he orchestrated the Citizens United ruling); now he's being vilified and some right wingers are openly calling for his resignation!
For as long as there is limited overs cricket - of ten, twenty or fifty overs - there will remain the Sri Lankan spinners' mid-innings choke
how does the Etch-a-Sketch guy still have a job
Romney has decided to simply not give interviews or give any policy positions. He wont even say whether he approves of the President's executive order re: illegal immigrants. No one likes him -- but it also means its impossible to hate him. I'm the biggest Obama supporter and even I'm 'meh' about him.
WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie
"People make me happy.. not places.. people"
"When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson
"Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn
#408. Sixty three not out forever.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)