Am I the only one who expects the Harriet Myers subpoena fight to end up in the Supreme Court?

[AlGore-08.com]

Whatever the Senate or House does in response to Myers not showing up, eventually Team Smirk will file a law suit in Federal Court claiming that Congress can't do whatever the Hell it is that Congress is trying to do. If they loose the first round, they'll fight it all the way to the Supreme Court, with the Alito Court ruling 5-4 that whatever the Hell Smirk's lawyers are arguing is Constitutional, and whatever the Hell part of the Constitution Smirk's lawyers are attacking is Unconstitutional?

[BlackHawk706867]

1. Yep it probably will go that route and the decision will come down to ...

Justice Kennedy.... And from there who knows? If the SC decides in *'s favor, we are hooped big time and time to pack your bags and follow me back to Canada... This will be safe for a very short period of time before he does an Annex on Canada..... So be prepared to move to... Who knows where next?

ww

[Sarah Ibarruri]

2. That's why it's INSANE that they're not seeking dual impeachment of both Dick and Bush nt

[whistle]

3. Congress of course will lose if it goes to the SCOTUS, unless Larry Flynt

...can find one or more of the conservative wing justices phone numbers on the DC Madam phone list!!!!:woohoo: :applause: :spray: We can only wish for a break

[countmyvote4real]

4. * has made the DOJ a joke all the way up to the SCOTUS.

The Democratic Congress needs to take this into their hands NOW.

[Jim Sagle]

5. If they charge them with inherent contempt of Congress, it never goes to court.

Courts have no jurisdiction whatever.

[librechik]

6. I hope Congress skips the Republican dominated Courts and tries the case itself

that would show the executive (gulp--we are very close to going down in flames, folks)

[JDPriestly]

16. A serious contempt on Gonzales part could constitute a

violation of law and therefore an impeachable offense, it seems to me. That is where this is leading.

[AlGore-08.com]

7. Anything can go to court, it's up to each court to decide if a case has enough merit to be heard

Not being a psychotic right winger without a shred of respect for the law, I can't know for sure, but my guess is that Team Smirk will try arguing one of the following:

1.) Contempt of Congress has been accepted as an implied power of Congress, so they will argue that Contempt of Congress is not really a power of the legislature so therefore the subpoena is meaningless.

2.) The subpoena does not meet the standards set under Wilkenson v The United States (1961) and therefore it is legally insufficient therefore Harriet Myers is in the clear for ignoring the subpoena.

3.) That the ruling given in Eastland v United States Servicemen's Fund (1975)was unconstitutional (for some bizarre, totally bogus reason) therefore the Supreme Court should revisit whether courts can intervene when Congress subpoenas someone and/or overturn contempt citations.

4.) Something so whacked out it doesn't occur to most people and seems ludicrous when argued before the Supreme Court but ends up being used as the basis of the Court's ruling.

[Jim Sagle]

14. The Congress could reply as Andrew Jackson did:

They have made their ruling, now let them enforce it.

[tom_paine]

8. Not the only one by a long site. And the corrupt and lawless "Supreme" "Court"

(which is NEITHER supreme nor a court of law anymore)

will indeed put any imprimatur of legality on any illegal act the Impeial Family Wishes them to, 5-4.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. It's unlikely

historically, neither the congress nor the president WANTS the Supreme Court to issue a decisive ruling on this, because both sides have too much to lose.

They'll likely negotiate some settlement.

[AlGore-08.com]

10. Bush has never shied away from Constitutional Crises

And what does he care how the ruling would affect him or future Presidents? He uses the law when it supports his position and ignores it when it doesn't support his position.

The only real question is how far will the current Supreme Court go to support Smirk? How deeply to they believe this "unitary executive" bs? Keep in mind that nobody except the Smirk/Satan 2000 campaign expected the Supreme Court to even hear Bush v. Gore, let alone issue a ruling so bogus they wrote into it that it couldn't EVER be used as a legal precedent.

[rudy23]

11. Call their bluff--let's let the Supreme Court declare a dictatorship a year out from elections

Let's let the Supreme Court name our next Democratic president as dictator of the country.

They don't want to do this. I say, bring it on.

[terisan]

12. We need to start talking publicly about Roberts recusing self. I believe he promised that he would

Of course, we know he is not a man of his word but getting the message out ahead of time does 2 things

It highlights that he was a White House insider. It presents the possibility that he will recuse himself and the Court will be tied or go 5-3 possibly in Congress's favor.

Congress has the power to impeach SC justices. It is time to lay the groundwork for this.

[defendandprotect]

13. Imagine this with Harriet Miers on the Supreme Court - - !!!!!

Could've happened --

[deacon]

15. Whats got to happen is that congress simply can't let bush get

away with this. He is out to save his ass AND embarrass the congress, show them who's boss type of thing. And right here, right now, congress needs to let them know that there are laws in this country that all are required to follow.