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

General Discussion

brer cat

(24,559 posts)

9. Thanks for posting this, Solly.

Reply to Solly Mack (Original post)

Thu Jul 5, 2018, 06:31 AM

Jul 2018

I guess it would be naïve to assume this is enough evidence for Murkowski and Collins.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Precedent and Jurisprudential Disagreement (stare decisis) by Amy Coney Barrett [View all] Solly Mack Jul 2018 OP

a revolutionary, sub rosa. elleng Jul 2018 #1

I've been digging about the net for her academic works. Solly Mack Jul 2018 #2

This is important. Solly Mack Jul 2018 #3

I also think she would. It's important that DUers read this so I recommended it. Sophia4 Jul 2018 #7

She's actually spelling out why she would in the paper. Solly Mack Jul 2018 #8

K&R... spanone Jul 2018 #4

Thank you Solly Mack Jul 2018 #5

👍🏼 spanone Jul 2018 #6

Thanks for posting this, Solly. brer cat Jul 2018 #9

Collins could claim that isn't a hostile demonstration. Solly Mack Jul 2018 #10

"The Constitution does not expressly protect a right to privacy," Amy C Barrett Solly Mack Jul 2018 #11

Brett Kavanaugh Solly Mack Jul 2018 #12

Raymond Kethledge Solly Mack Jul 2018 #13

... Solly Mack Jul 2018 #14

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Precedent and Jurispruden...»Reply #9