Log In
Create Account
SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ
Login
Create Account
Search
Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...
RSS Feed
Hosting by DigitalOcean
Support ST on Ko-Fi
Links Only
50 Results
100 Results
250 Results
500 Results
1000 Results
5000 Results
2 Weeks
2 Months
6 Months
1 Year
2 Years
5 Years
All Time
Live
Down to Post
Backboards:
Live
________________
1: Dec 11, 14:43
2: Dec 11, 11:29
3: Dec 11, 07:59
4: Dec 10, 18:15
5: Dec 10, 12:28
6: Dec 10, 09:30
7: Dec 10, 05:59
8: Dec 9, 17:07
9: Dec 9, 13:47
10: Dec 9, 10:33
11: Dec 9, 07:33
12: Dec 8, 17:50
13: Dec 8, 10:32
14: Dec 8, 06:23
15: Dec 7, 16:52
16: Dec 7, 07:17
17: Dec 6, 14:40
18: Dec 6, 10:07
19: Dec 6, 07:32
20: Dec 5, 19:48
Posts: 158
Mazars appears to be 7-2 that the House CAN issue subpoenas but these may be too broad and Courts below need to narrow them -- nm
Posted by
JackDawson (aka dawson)
Jul 9 '20, 07:21
(No message)
Responses:
Huh. I was wrong on this one. -- nm
-
Marquis de Krusty
Jul 9, 07:23
10
Based on the summary link I posted yesterday, it seemed easy for this one to go either way per conflicting precedence
-
ty97
Jul 9, 07:24
9
With my basic understanding of things I thought Vance had a very strong case while the House had a weak one. -- nm
-
Marquis de Krusty
Jul 9, 07:25
8
The Vance case definitely was stronger based on my layman read. -- nm*
-
ty97
Jul 9, 07:25
7
That was the expectation after the argument but if you think about it it was the opposite, right?
-
JackDawson
Jul 9, 07:26
6
Hmmm, interesting.
-
ty97
Jul 9, 07:28
It also means that the next President can be harassed by a state prosecutor in Mississippi trying to win re-election, right? -- nm
-
spamlet
Jul 9, 07:28
4
Thanks for tipping our hand, dude. -- nm
-
GOP
Jul 9, 07:34
on the other hand, the SCOTUS said unanimously in Clinton v. Jones that a president can be forced to sit for a civil deposition in a civil lawsuit whi
-
JackDawson
Jul 9, 07:30
Yup. -- nm
-
JackDawson
Jul 9, 07:29
Yeah, this was my immediate thought. Will become a new thing for local DAs of one party to harass the President perhaps -- nm
-
ty97
Jul 9, 07:29
So basically punt everything back to lower courts so this drags out past the election (on purpose by SCOTUS I'm guessing?)
-
ty97
Jul 9, 07:22
2
Many many times cases get thrown back to lower Courts. In Mazars, they announce a new standard. This punt is a "start all over punt
-
JackDawson
Jul 9, 07:24
1
Oh sure, remanding is not uncommon I realize. -- nm
-
ty97
Jul 9, 07:24
Yup. With the same lineup--Gorsuch and Kavanaugh with Roberts and libs. Sent back for a new look at the subpoenas under this new test --this will be
-
JackDawson
Jul 9, 07:22
1
That's a lot of words to say "no fishing" :-P -- nm
-
Baron Burr
Jul 9, 07:24
Post a message
top
Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.