VA SCOTUS oral arguments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The part about the Utah story that's so interesting to me is not the resignation, but that the legislature has created an entirely new court to hear constitutional disputes (including redistricting). Democrats should be learning from all of this.

Republicans are not shy in using their power. Slightly different context, but the legislatures in both Wisconsin and NC stripped the governor of power in lame duck sessions right after a democrat won the governorship in those states. Both Arizona and Georgia republicans expanded and packed their supreme courts when it became clear those states were going purple. And of course there was the attempt to keep Allison Riggs from taking her seat on the NC Supreme Court after she won the 2024 election. When the Iowa Supreme Court ruled abortion was a right protected by the state constitution, Iowa republicans passed a bunch of bills removing powers from the Chief Justice and giving them to the republican governor so he could pack the courts. The list goes on.

No kings, amirght?

It should be "no corrupt POSs" which covers all of the GOP.

OK, so you want a king as long as he is your king. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: is

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who do you think came up with this insane idea????

🚨Report: Democrats are trying to create a plan that will overturn the Virginia Supreme Court ruling that overturned their map

The plan would include lowering the mandatory retirement age for justices from 75 to 54 (or less). Therefore, that would remove every current justice on the court. Then the Democrat majority the state legislature would appoint 7 new justices and they would redraw the map to a 10D-1R map

Via: The New York Times

Wait until you hear what republicans did in Utah when they lost a redistricting case. The increased the number of judges of the court and created an entirely new court just for hearing redistricting cases while stripping the state Supreme Court of jurisdiction. And then for good measure, they launched a BS investigation of one of the judges who ruled against them, forcing her to resign.

Seems as if the Utah judge who resigned did so because of a HUGE conflict of interest. How did republicans “force” her to resign?

🚨New: The Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen has now resigned

She voted for the new Utah congressional map that gave Democrats an extra seat

The reason for her resignation is she allegedly had a romantic relationship with an attorney involved in the redistricting case

Interesting that this tweet doesn’t mention the fact that she recused herself from the case where he was the attorney. The complaint so obviously BS that the judicial conduct commission dismissed it, but the Utah legislature saw an opportunity to air all the dirty laundry around her divorce.

Meanwhile republicans do not care at all about Clarence Thomas accepting houses, RVs, private jet trips, vacations, etc. from parties in front of him. The also don’t care that Roberta wife gets paid millions as “consultant” to law firms appearing before him.

Exactly! All courts should be as corrupt as the SCOTUS.

Or as corrupt as the VA SC.

The author of the majority VA SC is a Democrat who was appointed by Democrat Mark Warner and approved by the Democrat majority in VA. Your assertion is that democrats are corrupt?

The VA governor does not appoint members of the VA Supreme Court. Kelsey was appointed by the VA GA in 2015 when it was controlled by republicans.

Does it really matter at this point? Judicial appointees can sometimes turn out to be awful even when appointed by the same political party (e.g., recall that Justice Souter, who was in the SCOTUS liberal voting bloc, was appointed by HW Bush). I can't make heads or tails of who was responsible for this guy getting onto the VA Supreme Court, but now the focus simply needs to be on how to fix this issue. Reducing the required retirement age makes perfect sense to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: is

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who do you think came up with this insane idea????

🚨Report: Democrats are trying to create a plan that will overturn the Virginia Supreme Court ruling that overturned their map

The plan would include lowering the mandatory retirement age for justices from 75 to 54 (or less). Therefore, that would remove every current justice on the court. Then the Democrat majority the state legislature would appoint 7 new justices and they would redraw the map to a 10D-1R map

Via: The New York Times

Wait until you hear what republicans did in Utah when they lost a redistricting case. The increased the number of judges of the court and created an entirely new court just for hearing redistricting cases while stripping the state Supreme Court of jurisdiction. And then for good measure, they launched a BS investigation of one of the judges who ruled against them, forcing her to resign.

Seems as if the Utah judge who resigned did so because of a HUGE conflict of interest. How did republicans “force” her to resign?

🚨New: The Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen has now resigned

She voted for the new Utah congressional map that gave Democrats an extra seat

The reason for her resignation is she allegedly had a romantic relationship with an attorney involved in the redistricting case

Interesting that this tweet doesn’t mention the fact that she recused herself from the case where he was the attorney. The complaint so obviously BS that the judicial conduct commission dismissed it, but the Utah legislature saw an opportunity to air all the dirty laundry around her divorce.

Meanwhile republicans do not care at all about Clarence Thomas accepting houses, RVs, private jet trips, vacations, etc. from parties in front of him. The also don’t care that Roberta wife gets paid millions as “consultant” to law firms appearing before him.

Exactly! All courts should be as corrupt as the SCOTUS.

Or as corrupt as the VA SC.

The author of the majority VA SC is a Democrat who was appointed by Democrat Mark Warner and approved by the Democrat majority in VA. Your assertion is that democrats are corrupt?

The VA governor does not appoint members of the VA Supreme Court. Kelsey was appointed by the VA GA in 2015 when it was controlled by republicans.

So, you will get rid of all the judges on the VASC. Then, since they get 12 year terms, they can be no older than 42 to be appointed.
Very stupid idea.

Does it really matter at this point? Judicial appointees can sometimes turn out to be awful even when appointed by the same political party (e.g., recall that Justice Souter, who was in the SCOTUS liberal voting bloc, was appointed by HW Bush). I can't make heads or tails of who was responsible for this guy getting onto the VA Supreme Court, but now the focus simply needs to be on how to fix this issue. Reducing the required retirement age makes perfect sense to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: is

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So who do you think came up with this insane idea????

🚨Report: Democrats are trying to create a plan that will overturn the Virginia Supreme Court ruling that overturned their map

The plan would include lowering the mandatory retirement age for justices from 75 to 54 (or less). Therefore, that would remove every current justice on the court. Then the Democrat majority the state legislature would appoint 7 new justices and they would redraw the map to a 10D-1R map

Via: The New York Times

Wait until you hear what republicans did in Utah when they lost a redistricting case. The increased the number of judges of the court and created an entirely new court just for hearing redistricting cases while stripping the state Supreme Court of jurisdiction. And then for good measure, they launched a BS investigation of one of the judges who ruled against them, forcing her to resign.

Seems as if the Utah judge who resigned did so because of a HUGE conflict of interest. How did republicans “force” her to resign?

🚨New: The Utah Supreme Court Justice Diana Hagen has now resigned

She voted for the new Utah congressional map that gave Democrats an extra seat

The reason for her resignation is she allegedly had a romantic relationship with an attorney involved in the redistricting case

Interesting that this tweet doesn’t mention the fact that she recused herself from the case where he was the attorney. The complaint so obviously BS that the judicial conduct commission dismissed it, but the Utah legislature saw an opportunity to air all the dirty laundry around her divorce.

Meanwhile republicans do not care at all about Clarence Thomas accepting houses, RVs, private jet trips, vacations, etc. from parties in front of him. The also don’t care that Roberta wife gets paid millions as “consultant” to law firms appearing before him.

Exactly! All courts should be as corrupt as the SCOTUS.

Or as corrupt as the VA SC.

The author of the majority VA SC is a Democrat who was appointed by Democrat Mark Warner and approved by the Democrat majority in VA. Your assertion is that democrats are corrupt?

The VA governor does not appoint members of the VA Supreme Court. Kelsey was appointed by the VA GA in 2015 when it was controlled by republicans.

Does it really matter at this point? Judicial appointees can sometimes turn out to be awful even when appointed by the same political party (e.g., recall that Justice Souter, who was in the SCOTUS liberal voting bloc, was appointed by HW Bush). I can't make heads or tails of who was responsible for this guy getting onto the VA Supreme Court, but now the focus simply needs to be on how to fix this issue. Reducing the required retirement age makes perfect sense to me.

It matters that the PP keeps lying about who appointed him

[Anonymous]

SCOTUS has been asked to take the case. Anyone with actual knowledge want to walk us through what's likely to happen next?

Not what you WANT to have happen. But handicap the law here.

Will SCOTUS grant cert?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS has been asked to take the case. Anyone with actual knowledge want to walk us through what's likely to happen next?

Not what you WANT to have happen. But handicap the law here.

Will SCOTUS grant cert?

Some of the legal pundits have said they are unlikely to take it.

Remember, the Dems went ahead with the election against legal advice.
When it was first appealed to the VA Supremes (before the election) the Dems argued that it was against precedent for them to rule until after the election.

During the hearing after the election. one of the Justices against the Dem attorney if the results of the election made a difference in the law. He responded that it did not have any effect on the law.

I suspect the legal pundits are correct and that the Supreme Court will not hear the case.

Word of advice: Dems need to get a new leader in the House. Jeffries is doing more harm than good. And, his brother's x account is quite troubling. Implying that violence is needed.

[Anonymous]

queen spanberger didn't get her way i guess

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS has been asked to take the case. Anyone with actual knowledge want to walk us through what's likely to happen next?

Not what you WANT to have happen. But handicap the law here.

Will SCOTUS grant cert?

SCOTUS is controlled by 6 partisan republicans. Overturning the VA SC would be bad for republicans. Therefore, they will not overturn the VA SC.

[Anonymous]

SCOTUS will not take the case b/c it is a state constitutional issue, not a federal/U.S. Constitution issue (even beyond the fact that VASC ruled correctly).

Jones knows this and only filed the suit (a) to make it look like he is "fighting" MAGA (b) Hakeem Jefferies told him to, and (c) so the Dems can continue their campaign to de-legitimize SCOTUS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS has been asked to take the case. Anyone with actual knowledge want to walk us through what's likely to happen next?

Not what you WANT to have happen. But handicap the law here.


Will SCOTUS grant cert?

Zero chance they take the case.

The US Supreme Court has long held that state Supreme Courts have the final word on the meaning of state constitutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS will not take the case b/c it is a state constitutional issue, not a federal/U.S. Constitution issue (even beyond the fact that VASC ruled correctly).

Jones knows this and only filed the suit (a) to make it look like he is "fighting" MAGA (b) Hakeem Jefferies told him to, and (c) so the Dems can continue their campaign to de-legitimize SCOTUS.

Does Virginia not have any good constitutional lawyers? Why in the world are they using a California firm?

[Anonymous]

Don’t count your chickens……

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS will not take the case b/c it is a state constitutional issue, not a federal/U.S. Constitution issue (even beyond the fact that VASC ruled correctly).

Jones knows this and only filed the suit (a) to make it look like he is "fighting" MAGA (b) Hakeem Jefferies told him to, and (c) so the Dems can continue their campaign to de-legitimize SCOTUS.

Does Virginia not have any good constitutional lawyers? Why in the world are they using a California firm?

Because the AG is incompetent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS will not take the case b/c it is a state constitutional issue, not a federal/U.S. Constitution issue (even beyond the fact that VASC ruled correctly).

Jones knows this and only filed the suit (a) to make it look like he is "fighting" MAGA (b) Hakeem Jefferies told him to, and (c) so the Dems can continue their campaign to de-legitimize SCOTUS.

Does Virginia not have any good constitutional lawyers? Why in the world are they using a California firm?

When the law firms sued over all the executive orders targeting them, every single one of them hired another law firm to represent them. That didn't mean that the law firms didn't have their own capable lawyers. It simply means that, in certain circumstances of exceptional importance, lawyers hire outside lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SCOTUS will not take the case b/c it is a state constitutional issue, not a federal/U.S. Constitution issue (even beyond the fact that VASC ruled correctly).

Jones knows this and only filed the suit (a) to make it look like he is "fighting" MAGA (b) Hakeem Jefferies told him to, and (c) so the Dems can continue their campaign to de-legitimize SCOTUS.

Does Virginia not have any good constitutional lawyers? Why in the world are they using a California firm?

When the law firms sued over all the executive orders targeting them, every single one of them hired another law firm to represent them. That didn't mean that the law firms didn't have their own capable lawyers. It simply means that, in certain circumstances of exceptional importance, lawyers hire outside lawyers.

Well, if it is the same guy that argued before the Va Supreme Court, he did not do a very good job. I listened to the hearing. Anyone who listened to it had to know the Dems would lose. The guy gave terrible answers. I'm not a lawyer, but I thought it was pretty obvious they would lose.