Anonymous wrote:I'm not particularly receptive to what the Federalist Society member legal counsel for plaintiffs thinks is a wise expenditure or outlier in legal view when MCPS prevailed in both district and circuit court and was a 6-3 decision at SCOTUS.

I just love it when ignorant boobs say the dumbest things here. I’m a member of the Federalist Society and have been for decades. It it’s a nonprofit lecture and discussion society. And it brings in liberals like Nadine Strossen or ACLU type for every single panel to present a balanced argument. Please tell me a) where it had anything to do with this lawsuit (it didn’t - it doesn’t do that sort of thing - ever - it can’t as a non-profit), and b) tell me who the “Federalist Society legal counsel” is on this matter because there is none. There are no in-house or outside lawyers working on any “issue” cases. Those are referred to private litigators who choose what cases they want.

Please educate are yourself next time before posting. Not everything is as the liberal
Media wants you to believe. I suggest starting with Fed Soc’s wiki page or its own website. I encourage you also to attend a seminar and see for yourself

The order doesn’t seem to say 1.5M. Is that an attorneys fee order? I don’t know how the plaintiffs could have any monetary damages so seems like attorneys fees would be the only thing they are entitled to. That seems like a lot since there wasn’t a trial and it was just briefing the same issue at three levels but I’m sure they put in at max rates.

Irrelevant, the system would buckle if every party operated on the basis of whether theirs might be one of 60 cases granted cert that year and what the result might be. Though obviously you have very powerful cert-knowing ability, so your results may vary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not particularly receptive to what the Federalist Society member legal counsel for plaintiffs thinks is a wise expenditure or outlier in legal view when MCPS prevailed in both district and circuit court and was a 6-3 decision at SCOTUS.

Irrelevant. MCPS offered an opt out option, then changed its mind after political pressure. That decision cost it millions and set a Supreme Court precedent that will live for decades. MCPS should have known what would happen based on the current makeup of the Court.

Anonymous wrote:I'm not particularly receptive to what the Federalist Society member legal counsel for plaintiffs thinks is a wise expenditure or outlier in legal view when MCPS prevailed in both district and circuit court and was a 6-3 decision at SCOTUS.

Irrelevant. MCPS offered an opt out option, then changed its mind after political pressure. That decision cost it millions and set a Supreme Court precedent that will live for decades. MCPS should have known what would happen based on the current makeup of the Court.

I'm not particularly receptive to what the Federalist Society member legal counsel for plaintiffs thinks is a wise expenditure or outlier in legal view when MCPS prevailed in both district and circuit court and was a 6-3 decision at SCOTUS.