Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
7 replies, 1018 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (18)
ReplyReply to this post
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Eastman believed Clarence would back his theories to overthrow the government (Original Post)
deminks
Mar 2022
OP
Pence's aide testified that Eastman said there were 2 justices who might support him
deminks
Mar 2022
#5
RKP5637
(67,008 posts)1. Thomas, NEVER should have been on SCOTUS! n/t
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)2. Eastman clerked for Thomas
empedocles
(15,751 posts)4. TY
gab13by13
(20,784 posts)3. I'm sure he would
or Ginni would cut him off.
deminks
(11,001 posts)5. Pence's aide testified that Eastman said there were 2 justices who might support him
Thomas, and one other he doesn't remember who Eastman said.
I think the other may be Alito. Krazy Kraaken lady lawyer said there was a plan to bring the Gomert case to Alito who was already to go with it. I have not forgotten this. Yeah, it came from Krazy Kraaken lady, but a stopped clock is right twice a day.
https://www.newsweek.com/sidney-powell-drags-justice-samuel-alito-supreme-court-january-6-mess-1632896
deminks
(11,001 posts)6. So what, you say, 2 justices would not have prevailed if others did not go in with them.
The fear, I say in reply, is that Thomas or Alito would have used the secretive shadow docket, which does not require a vote or deliberations, or written majority or minority reports.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/31/supreme-court-us-cases-shadow-docket
snip
Welcome to the shadow docket, the so-called emergency proceedings that now constitute the majority of the supreme courts business. Minimally argued, rarely justified and decided without transparency, shadow docket orders were once a tool the court used to dispense with unremarkable and legally unambiguous matters. To have an issue addressed on the shadow docket, a litigant has to apply for emergency relief usually to stop a decision against them from a lower court from going into effect while appeals proceed. Traditionally, applicants would need to demonstrate that they would suffer irreparable harm if their petition wasnt granted immediately. So one historical use of the shadow docket has been in federal death penalty cases, where the court has used the emergency proceeding to affirm or deny requests for stays of execution.
But in recent years the court has largely dispensed with any meaningful application of the irreparable harm standard, and instead has entertained emergency relief petitions from more and more litigants, issuing shadow docket rulings on increasingly significant and controversial legal questions without the rigor or transparency that such issues demand.
But in recent years the court has largely dispensed with any meaningful application of the irreparable harm standard, and instead has entertained emergency relief petitions from more and more litigants, issuing shadow docket rulings on increasingly significant and controversial legal questions without the rigor or transparency that such issues demand.
end snip
Sneederbunk
(14,185 posts)7. A clear and present danger.