Tue May 12, 2020, 10:39 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
Think we just lost the Supreme Court case
Kavanaugh softballed House Counsel Doug Letter with a chance to clarify a limiting principle on a House subpoena power and Letter could not do it. Ugh he’s so bad. He’s always been bad. Ugh ugh.
|
38 replies, 3291 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | OP |
a kennedy | May 2020 | #1 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #3 | |
onecaliberal | May 2020 | #12 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #19 | |
onecaliberal | May 2020 | #25 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #2 | |
TruckFump | May 2020 | #5 | |
BComplex | May 2020 | #15 | |
jimfields33 | May 2020 | #4 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #7 | |
jimfields33 | May 2020 | #13 | |
SoonerPride | May 2020 | #6 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #14 | |
SoonerPride | May 2020 | #20 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #22 | |
Mike 03 | May 2020 | #8 | |
idziak4ever1234 | May 2020 | #9 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #16 | |
malaise | May 2020 | #10 | |
Iliyah | May 2020 | #11 | |
Takket | May 2020 | #17 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #24 | |
kentuck | May 2020 | #18 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #27 | |
BComplex | May 2020 | #21 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #23 | |
BComplex | May 2020 | #26 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #28 | |
Amishman | May 2020 | #30 | |
qazplm135 | May 2020 | #29 | |
rusty fender | May 2020 | #31 | |
duforsure | May 2020 | #32 | |
grantcart | May 2020 | #33 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #34 | |
grantcart | May 2020 | #35 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #38 | |
octoberlib | May 2020 | #36 | |
Loki Liesmith | May 2020 | #37 |
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:40 AM
a kennedy (22,049 posts)
1. Justice Beer Man???
Will NEVER forget “I like beer”.
![]() ![]() |
Response to a kennedy (Reply #1)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:40 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
3. He tried to HELP our side though.
Our counsel was terrible.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #3)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:44 AM
onecaliberal (19,606 posts)
12. The fucking precedent should save our side. I'm sick of republicans acting like
the law only applies to democrats or democratic principles.
|
Response to onecaliberal (Reply #12)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:46 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
19. What we are tired of is not a good court argument
Our lawyer did a clownishly bad job.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #19)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:53 AM
onecaliberal (19,606 posts)
25. of course.
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:40 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
2. Either Roberts saves the day by inventing a limiting principle or we are screwed.
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #2)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:42 AM
TruckFump (3,950 posts)
5. Agree. EOM
This is the DU member formerly known as TruckFump.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #2)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:45 AM
BComplex (5,293 posts)
15. Roberts has been carrying trumps water all day.
Our lawyer is so friggin' bad.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:41 AM
jimfields33 (4,744 posts)
4. Maybe RBG or another liberal can clean it up by asking again another way but
same meaning. Hope so anyway.
|
Response to jimfields33 (Reply #4)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:43 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
7. They tried.
Letter wouldn’t engage. I’m mad bc Letter has been a bumbling fool before. This was too important to hand to him.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #7)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:44 AM
jimfields33 (4,744 posts)
13. Damn. Thanks for keeping us informed on what is going on.
![]() |
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:43 AM
SoonerPride (9,463 posts)
6. Why would there need to be a limiting principle?
Response to SoonerPride (Reply #6)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:45 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
14. Both conservative and liberal justices wanted one because
It helps keep one branch from overstepping the authority of another.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #14)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:47 AM
SoonerPride (9,463 posts)
20. Isn't that for SCOTUS to decide anyway?
We think you've gone too far here in this instance.
Asking one branch to unilaterally disarm and limit their oversight or power seems tenuous at best. The executive branch argues it has limitless power. Can't the legislative branch assert the same? |
Response to SoonerPride (Reply #20)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:50 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
22. They could but Letter didn't argue that
Sometimes bold arguments that are wrong can still work to your advantage. Letter just kept citing “legitimate legislative purpose.” If you bring a standard like that you’d better define it.
Really depressed. |
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:43 AM
Mike 03 (16,420 posts)
8. Maybe I misheard, but Breyer didn't sound very happy with the
House counsel either.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:43 AM
idziak4ever1234 (1,145 posts)
9. This needs to go the House's way or
It will cement the public view that the Supreme Court is partisan. The American people want those documents.
|
Response to idziak4ever1234 (Reply #9)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:45 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
16. The hope is Roberts recognizes this
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:43 AM
malaise (225,426 posts)
10. Aren't there three cases? n/t
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:44 AM
Iliyah (24,954 posts)
11. A decision could come months later . . .
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:46 AM
Takket (13,964 posts)
17. What is a limiting principle?
Response to Takket (Reply #17)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:53 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
24. Guideline that constrains a governmental power
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:46 AM
kentuck (100,929 posts)
18. Where did they get that guy? Letter?
Very weak and unprepared. Unbelievable!
|
Response to kentuck (Reply #18)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:54 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
27. Republicans have invested heavily in grooming shark lawyers
We have not.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:50 AM
BComplex (5,293 posts)
21. Justice Ginsberg is tired, and sounding like it.
She's not showing her sharp mind right now. And trump's lawyers are kickin' ass with the help of the majority of the supremes.
|
Response to BComplex (Reply #21)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:52 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
23. I still think Roberts, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch could go our way
But after today a heavy lift.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #23)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:53 AM
BComplex (5,293 posts)
26. I don't agree, but I hope you're right.
They are going to let trump walk.
|
Response to BComplex (Reply #26)
Tue May 12, 2020, 10:55 AM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
28. Oh at this point I think your belief is more likely
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #23)
Tue May 12, 2020, 11:53 AM
Amishman (3,360 posts)
30. gorsuch could definitely go our way
he doesn't come across as blatantly partizan, just rather conservative
He also seems to be skeptical of presidential authority as a whole |
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 11:47 AM
qazplm135 (5,400 posts)
29. Oral arguments don't matter much
most of the time. Doubt this is an exception. It will be a 5-4 decision either saying they won't get involved or giving some sort of narrow ruling favorable to Trump in this case.
I suspect the former. |
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 11:58 AM
rusty fender (3,185 posts)
31. Don't get you panties in a bunch
We lost it in 2016
![]() This is the DU member formerly known as rusty fender.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 12:00 PM
duforsure (10,932 posts)
32. Would this hearing be different
If its found out that trump and his crew have been contacting Justices about this and others cases with bribes , or threats , or in any way influence their decision? Shouldn't any Justice have a obligation to recuse if there have been inappropriate contacts made? If that were to be exposed wouldn't that make this case results corrupted?
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 12:07 PM
grantcart (51,194 posts)
33. We are listening to different hearings
Are you aware that there are 3 different cases and 6 different groups of litigator s
The state hearing is clearly going well |
Response to grantcart (Reply #33)
Tue May 12, 2020, 12:11 PM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
34. Yes. Did you see my other post?
Response to Loki Liesmith (Reply #34)
Tue May 12, 2020, 12:19 PM
grantcart (51,194 posts)
35. No but if you no longer agree with this OP you should delete it
Seems like you want to provide ongoing commentary, suggest you start a watch thread to give real time comments so people can follow the context and flow |
Response to grantcart (Reply #35)
Tue May 12, 2020, 02:39 PM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
38. But I don't disagree with this post
Oral arguments for the House’s suit were awful and I expect a negative decision on it.
|
Response to Loki Liesmith (Original post)
Tue May 12, 2020, 12:56 PM
octoberlib (13,679 posts)
36. Thank god for Carey Dunne.
Link to tweet Carey Dunne, NYDA’s General Counsel, did a spectacular job on the grand jury case in SCOTUS today. He was helpful to every justice, precise, candid, accurate, & provided the strongest possible defensible arguments for NY against Trump. I’d give him an A or A+, very rare for me. This is the DU member formerly known as octoberlib.
|
Response to octoberlib (Reply #36)
Tue May 12, 2020, 02:31 PM
Loki Liesmith (4,325 posts)
37. Yeah that part of the case was brilliant.
Congressional subpoena power is where I was most concerned tho. So winning on that but losing here would be a bitter pill.
|