Jump to content
Motor City Sonics

The Supreme Court

Recommended Posts

I would expect that Ginsberg, Stevens and maybe even Souter will be retiring within the next 18 months.

I would not be the least bit surprised if Dennis Archer was considered. Maybe even Bill Clinton (Taft went from President to Supreme Court).

I think big, big changes are coming to the court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BetRivers Michigan Sports Betting

BetRivers Michigan $50 Launch Offer

Michigan online sports betting is launching in January 2021. Pre-register at BetRivers Sportsbook and get a free $50 bonus at their online sportsbook & casino with no deposit necessary.

Claim $50 at BetRivers Michigan Now

Archer would not be horrid. Jennifer Granholm wouldn't be horrid. Granholm might be a terrible Governor, but she was not a bad Attorney General and she was a good Assistant US Attorney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would expect that Ginsberg, Stevens and maybe even Souter will be retiring within the next 18 months.

I would not be the least bit surprised if Dennis Archer was considered. Maybe even Bill Clinton (Taft went from President to Supreme Court).

I think big, big changes are coming to the court.

The only "change" would occur is Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, or Kennedy retired. I don't think that's going to happen.

Actually, a choice like Granholm would be good -- at least from a Prosecutor's point of view which is what I really care about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clinton on there would present a problem to me.

Why?

wait, wasn't he disbarred? Can he be a judge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The only "change" would occur is Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, or Kennedy retired. I don't think that's going to happen.

Actually, a choice like Granholm would be good -- at least from a Prosecutor's point of view which is what I really care about.

The Supreme Court has been changed inalterably by Bush I and II. Obama's election means that the Kennedy will still be the swing vote, because now Stevens and Ginsburg can retire and not be replaced by right wing ideologues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Supreme Court has been changed inalterably by Bush I and II. Obama's election means that the Kennedy will still be the swing vote, because now Stevens and Ginsburg can retire and not be replaced by right wing ideologues.

Which sucks. I just hope some damn "all the criminals are innocent" justice isn't appointed (we have several of those types thanks to Clinton in the Eastern District).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone can be a Supreme Court Justice -- it isn't limited to lawyers.

Yeah, but if you were a lawyer and were disbarred, would that keep you from being a judge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which sucks. I just hope some damn "all the criminals are innocent" justice isn't appointed (we have several of those types thanks to Clinton in the Eastern District).

As opposed to all the "throw everyone arrested in jail" judges appointed by Reagan and Bush?

Cause cops are NEVER wrong...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, but if you were a lawyer and were disbarred, would that keep you from being a judge?

It would probably keep you from getting confirmed by the Senate. But that's the only requirement. In theory, Obama could nominate TheCouga (who isn't an attorney to my knowledge) to the bench.

Besides, I think Clinton's suspension of his law license should be expired by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Archer would not be horrid. Jennifer Granholm wouldn't be horrid. Granholm might be a terrible Governor, but she was not a bad Attorney General and she was a good Assistant US Attorney.

I think Jen is going to be in the discussion for Attorney General.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As opposed to all the "throw everyone arrested in jail" judges appointed by Reagan and Bush?

Cause cops are NEVER wrong...

You do know I'm a prosecutor, yes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not be the least bit surprised if Dennis Archer was considered. Maybe even Bill Clinton (Taft went from President to Supreme Court).

Bill lost his law license during Monica-gate (by the Supreme Court, no less). i think that would be black eye enough to keep him off.

Hilliary, on the other hand, still has her law license and is owed a favor or 2.

edit: a little research shows his law license was suspended in Arkansas (yeah, like he will ever go back there). but he was barred from arguing before the Supreme Court (not like he was ever good enough to do that either).

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/News/ClintonDisbar-011001.htm

Clinton Disbarred From Supreme Court

By Anne Gearan

Associated Press Writer

Monday, Oct. 1, 2001; 10:48 a.m. EDT

WASHINGTON –– The Supreme Court ordered former President Clinton disbarred from practicing law before the high court on Monday and gave him 40 days to contest the order.

The court did not explain its reasons, but Supreme Court disbarment often follows disbarment in lower courts.

In April, Clinton's Arkansas law license was suspended for five years and he paid a $25,000 fine. The original disbarment lawsuit was brought by a committee of the Arkansas Supreme Court.

There are no fines associated with the Supreme Court action. Most lawyers who are admitted to the Supreme Court bar never actually argue a case there, but the right to do so is considered an honor.

Clinton agreed to the Arkansas fine and suspension Jan. 19, the day before he left office, as part of an understanding with Independent Counsel Robert Ray to end the Monica Lewinsky investigation.

The agreement also satisfied the legal effort by the Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct to disbar Clinton for giving misleading testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case.

The Supreme Court followed its standard rules in the Clinton case, which include suspending Clinton from practice in the court and giving him 40 day to show why he should not be permanently disbarred.

The court order did not mention any vote by the justices.

"Whenever a member of the bar of this court has been disbarred or suspended from practice of any court of record, or has engaged in conduct unbecoming a member of the bar of this court, the court will enter an order suspending that member from practice before this court," Supreme Court rules say.

Julia Payne, a spokeswoman for Clinton, referred calls to his lawyer, David Kendall, in Washington. Kendall did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Jen is going to be in the discussion for Attorney General.

I wouldn't be opposed to that. From what I hear, she was a very good prosecutor and a good AG here in MI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill lost his law license during Monica-gate (by the Supreme Court, no less). i think that would be black eye enough to keep him off.

Hilliary, on the other hand, still has her law license and is owed a favor or 2.

I think Bill's license was either suspended or voluntarily surrendered for 5 years in the wake of Monica. If he were to try for reinstatement, I'd be he'd get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You do know I'm a prosecutor, yes?

I do.

My experiences with cops and prosecutors has been very mixed. Chicago isn't exactly the home of quality policework.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do.

My experiences with cops and prosecutors has been very mixed. Chicago isn't exactly the home of quality policework.

My experience with cops has been almost uniformly excellent and I've really gained an appreciation of the professionalism of the officers I've had the pleasure of working with. Then again, I don't see many Cook County cases. :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary will remain in the Senate. I think Obama is going to lobby to replace Harry Reid and put Hillary in as Senate Majority Leader. She'd be a lot better than Reid has been - he's a weakling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hillary will remain in the Senate. I think Obama is going to lobby to replace Harry Reid and put Hillary in as Senate Majority Leader. She'd be a lot better than Reid has been - he's a weakling.

Obama would be wise to do so. The painful truth is, Hillary is much more pragmatic and less dogmatically liberal than my conservative colleagues would let on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My experience with cops has been almost uniformly excellent and I've really gained an appreciation of the professionalism of the officers I've had the pleasure of working with. Then again, I don't see many Cook County cases. :grin:

I doubt you have many cases from 10 or 15 years ago overturned because the cops used torture to elicit confessions from people. We get them all the time here in Chicago.

My experience on the other side from prosecutors has been that they don't care about the rules as much as they care about getting a conviction. But they're much better than the cops, who don't give a **** about anything other than finding someone - anyone - guilty of a crime (which, most of the times they are).

But I expect them to be better than cops. Prosecutors are educated people who take oaths and should take them seriously. Cops are cops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hillary will remain in the Senate. I think Obama is going to lobby to replace Harry Reid and put Hillary in as Senate Majority Leader. She'd be a lot better than Reid has been - he's a weakling.

I don't like either Reid or Pelosi. Replace them both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But they're much better than the cops, who don't give a **** about anything other than finding someone - anyone - guilty of a crime (which, most of the times they are).

But I expect them to be better than cops. Prosecutors are educated people who take oaths and should take them seriously. Cops are cops.

That's not been my experience with cops that I've worked with. Most want to get the right guy, and get them the hell out of their community.

But Chicago's government in general and cops in particular don't exactly have the best reputation for ethics. So your experiences may be, shall we say, a bit tinged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not been my experience with cops that I've worked with. Most want to get the right guy, and get them the hell out of their community.

But Chicago's government in general and cops in particular don't exactly have the best reputation for ethics. So your experiences may be, shall we say, a bit tinged.

I think you are right for the most part.

Chicago cops - and the cops in some of Chicago's suburbs are even worse - are atrocious. Not all of them, probably not even a majority of them, but a lot of them.

You should see the number of civil cases brought against cops and the City of Chicago around here. i've got a piece of one now where they allegedly tortured a guy for a 24 hours trying to get some machinery back for one of their friends.

again, allegedly. But still...

Then again, I'm willing to bet that the Chicago cops have to deal with **** that I never will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bigger issue may be the other federal judgeships, particularly the Appeals Courts. There are a fair amount of openings in those areas that the Senate has not been allowing to be filled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Michigan Sports Betting Offer

Michigan is launching online sports betting and casino apps in January 2021. These top Michigan sportsbooks have pre-launch bonus offers. No deposit is required. Terms and conditions apply.

BetRivers Michigan - If you sign up at BetRivers Michigan now, you will receive $50 in free bets to use one their online sportsbook & casino

Click Here to claim $50 at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Now

FanDuel Michigan - If you register now before FanDuel launches in January, you will receive $100 to use at their sportsbook app & online casino.

Click Here to claim $100 at FanDuel Michigan For Registering Now

BetMGM Michigan - If you sign up early at BetMGM Michigan before launch, you will receive $200 in free bets to use at their online casino & sportsbook

Click Here to claim $200 at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Early

   


×
×
  • Create New...