So, how will THIS SCOTUS rule on the issue at hand? If there are lawsuits, it will end with SCOTUS

[graham4anything]

therefore, how will it rule?


and then what?

Isn't the irony drippingly delicious?

(I say drippingly delicious because Ralph Nader said both parties are the same.
Therefore the 4 to 5 court would be the same had Gore been seated, right?

So would the next court with President Obama picking a few more, and the next democratic president picking a few more.

But, as both parties are the same according to Ralph Nader, it matters little, right?

So this court now, will be the same as the next one, right?

So how will the court rule?

Legal?
Illegal?

[madinmaryland]

1. It really depends on what SCOTUS is ruling on. Until we know what they are ruling on and

when they rule on it, we really don't know.

Are you aware of any lawsuits that have been filed?

[graham4anything]

3. other threads said the ACLU and the lawyer who sued Clinton made noise about doing so

and that alt media writer also said something about SCOTUS

So will that mean Scalia will agree with him?

true irony either way, no?''

and rand paul (ron was also a 3rd partyist) said he was going to sue

The irony being because of Ralph Nader, no matter what the feeling is, the current SCOTUS is going to vote on this

and what do you think they would vote??

[madinmaryland]

6. So what will the SCOTUS be ruling on and when will they be ruling on? Can you be

a bit more specific?

TIA

[Tx4obama]

2. Who the heck is listening to Ralph Nader?

The Democratic Party is NOTHING like the Republican Party.

And the majority of the conservative justices on the SCOTUS are sure the hell nothing like the liberal justices.

.

[graham4anything]

4. I was being ironic, I know that.(of course I know that).

[Tx4obama]

5. Okay :)

[snot]

7. I'm optimistic about the ACLU suit.

I seem to recall that they or others tried to object to something like this before and got poured out on the catch-22 ground that they couldn't show they'd actually been spied on (the catch-22 being that they would have needed a way to compel the government to open its records in order to show that they'd been spied on, but the court wasn't going to order that because of national security concerns).

This time, it seems nearly certain that the ACLU's info was scooped up along with others, since I understand it's a customer of I think Verizon, which I think was one of the companies involved (feel free to correct me if needed). This means the ACLU will have standing.

I'm no Constitutional lawyer, but if the kind of indiscriminate, long-term collection of info that's been going on isn't a violation of the Fourth Amendment, I can't imagine what is.

UPDATE: Yeah, details here, posted more or less while I was posting this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022997482

[graham4anything]

9. So, is Nader's court going to agree with them or will they toss it out? What would Ralph Nader do?

after all, Ralph PICKED this supreme court 5.

Without Nader, we would NOT have Roberts and Alito (though according to Nader, Gore would have picked Roberts and Alito).

the irony is a triple dog dare delicious like Ralph in a Christmas Story.

See Ralph- actions get consequences.

Nader how 2013.

[Gman]

8. Fuck Nader

Everything that has happened since Jan 21, 2001 is ultimately his fault.