Quote:
Originally Posted by douglas1999
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Conservative judges have voted liberal and vice versa many times. That's the whole point of the supreme court and the judiciary generally; you aren't supposed to vote rigidly along party lines or personal bias.
This is what caused OJ simpson to be declared innocent in the first trial; the personal biases of the jury.
|
If you want to know how the court would rule, look to the past - the Supremes are big on precedent.
In Bush v Gore, the conservatives stopped the recount because they said that the Legislature of Florida said they intended all the Florida citizens to participate in the federal elections, and the votes have to be in by a certain date hard stop. With that date coming up, the Supreme Court bowed to the wish of the Florida lawmakers.
The liberals argued that the Florida Supreme Court should make that decision. If they wanted to mess with the recounts and miss the final federal vote tally date, that was up to the judges in Florida.
This is because conservatives are originalists, so they go back to the source, in that case the FL statutes. The liberal guys are activists so they wanted to FL judges to make the decisions.
In the present term, if there is any dispute regarding vote tallies and when or who can count what or when, look for the newly-solid conservative court to let the state legislature decide - so whatever the PA law is that's what's going to happen in PA.