Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
30 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The 11th circuit has judges appointed by Trump, Garland has to consider that. (Original Post) fightforfreedom Sep 2022 OP
They may also possibly be educated AND tired of Trump. dchill Sep 2022 #1
Possibly, though the RW extremists he appointed to SCOTUS are educated. Hortensis Sep 2022 #16
It's just hard for me to believe that multiple federal judges... dchill Sep 2022 #19
Garland should arrest the judge for obstructing justice. Emile Sep 2022 #2
No. Good grief they do that in central and South America jimfields33 Sep 2022 #5
Examples? Emile Sep 2022 #9
Toward the bottom of the article jimfields33 Sep 2022 #21
Don't see it. Emile Sep 2022 #23
Good God, no! That's banana republic stuff. Ocelot II Sep 2022 #12
Examples? Emile Sep 2022 #13
Judges have been charged with obstruction of justice in the US, but there has to be evidence Ocelot II Sep 2022 #14
So they can be charged with obstruction. Emile Sep 2022 #15
Only if there is evidence of something like bribery or witness tampering, Ocelot II Sep 2022 #17
The Federalist Society seems to have done considerable... dchill Sep 2022 #20
They recommend the judges to the president jimfields33 Sep 2022 #22
They don't have the criminal Federalist Society. Kingofalldems Sep 2022 #27
Do I have to say that? Isn't that bothsiderist? dchill Sep 2022 #30
Nope Fiendish Thingy Sep 2022 #3
I hope you are right. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #4
Yesterday was a holiday, both DOJ and Courts closed. Nt Fiendish Thingy Sep 2022 #7
I rob a bank, the money becomes my personal property, the FBI can't take the money. Irish_Dem Sep 2022 #6
+1 spot on! Emile Sep 2022 #10
and yesterday it was reported that should a decision go to SCOTUS CatWoman Sep 2022 #8
Dam! I did not know that. fightforfreedom Sep 2022 #11
If the chief justice is dissenting from the majority, the Hortensis Sep 2022 #18
Clarence sits H2O Man Sep 2022 #24
that's what I meant CatWoman Sep 2022 #25
I think that H2O Man Sep 2022 #26
totally agree CatWoman Sep 2022 #28
Right. H2O Man Sep 2022 #29

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
16. Possibly, though the RW extremists he appointed to SCOTUS are educated.
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:21 PM
Sep 2022

Let's hope, in any case. I understand they are bound by precedent, though not how that might or might not apply here, which SCOTUS is not.

dchill

(38,465 posts)
19. It's just hard for me to believe that multiple federal judges...
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:26 PM
Sep 2022

... would consider following the law optional.

Ocelot II

(115,661 posts)
12. Good God, no! That's banana republic stuff.
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:08 PM
Sep 2022

It's amazing how authoritarian liberals can get when they don't like the other side's authoritarianism.

Ocelot II

(115,661 posts)
14. Judges have been charged with obstruction of justice in the US, but there has to be evidence
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:18 PM
Sep 2022

of something like bribery or witness tampering. A judge can't be arrested just for issuing a biased or partisan decision; the remedy for that is the appeal process. This is the obstruction of justice statute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1505

Ocelot II

(115,661 posts)
17. Only if there is evidence of something like bribery or witness tampering,
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:24 PM
Sep 2022

which falls under the general category of obstruction. Rendering a partisan decision isn't that.

jimfields33

(15,763 posts)
22. They recommend the judges to the president
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:48 PM
Sep 2022

Are you saying that Democratic Presidents don’t have a group choosing judges for the President to pick?

Fiendish Thingy

(15,568 posts)
3. Nope
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 11:18 AM
Sep 2022

If DOJ doesn’t appeal, then all future criminal investigations will be halted due to potential “reputational damage” to the target; in addition, all stolen property becomes property of the thief, and cannot be seized by a warrant.

Cannon’s ruling will not stand, regardless of how the 11th circuit rules.

SCOTUS already ruled against Trump on this issue in January.

Irish_Dem

(46,880 posts)
6. I rob a bank, the money becomes my personal property, the FBI can't take the money.
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 11:29 AM
Sep 2022

And they can't charge me because it will hurt my feelings and damage my reputation.

I have always been so careful about following the law, I rarely even get a traffic ticket.

I guess I am an idiot.

CatWoman

(79,294 posts)
8. and yesterday it was reported that should a decision go to SCOTUS
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:00 PM
Sep 2022

Clarence Thomas has jurisdiction over that court.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
18. If the chief justice is dissenting from the majority, the
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 12:24 PM
Sep 2022

justice in the majority assigns, which happens a lot more often to Roberts now and, as indicated, is Thomas. Wonder if scholars still consider him the most extreme RW justice or someone's tying with him?

The things you learn in interesting times.

H2O Man

(73,528 posts)
26. I think that
Tue Sep 6, 2022, 01:20 PM
Sep 2022

after we make gains in November, Clarence needs to be impeached. The Senate might not convict him, of course. But he at very least needs to be impeached.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The 11th circuit has judg...