General Discussion

unblock

(56,213 posts)

36. "immediately" in supreme court time scale can mean a month or few.

Reply to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #32)

Fri Oct 11, 2019, 11:54 AM

Oct 2019

yes it jumps up in the schedule ahead of less urgent matters, but the appellant still needs to file the appeal, a justice needs to read it and decide if the full court will hear it, then schedule that to happen, then they have to decide it, etc.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

71 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

BREAKING: Appeals Court has REJECTED Trump's appeal of the House Oversight Committee's subpoena for [View all] demmiblue Oct 2019 OP

K & R!!! 50 Shades Of Blue Oct 2019 #1

Rick Wilson on the news joost5 Oct 2019 #42

I'm celebrating a temporary win and you're quoting a temporary ally. 50 Shades Of Blue Oct 2019 #46

You're correct joost5 Oct 2019 #52

When Trump is gone Wilson will go back to attacking Democrats. 50 Shades Of Blue Oct 2019 #53

When Trump is gone Wilson will go back to attacking Democrats. LenaBaby61 Oct 2019 #55

That's how I feel. 50 Shades Of Blue Oct 2019 #58

I could listen to them rail against Trump ALL DAY LONG. They are usually right on that part. NCLefty Oct 2019 #70

Why should they change how they feel about politics? Loki Liesmith Oct 2019 #71

You know what? MyOwnPeace Oct 2019 #66

*gasp* NCLefty Oct 2019 #69

K & R for visibility .... n/t MFGsunny Oct 2019 #2

Big Win for Democracy! Cha Oct 2019 #3

Next stop is SCOTUS? NewJeffCT Oct 2019 #4

En Banc review Sanity Claws Oct 2019 #8

Thanks NewJeffCT Oct 2019 #9

It may go to en banc review. Sanity Claws Oct 2019 #12

When or if it does hit scotus what's your best guess on what will happen? cstanleytech Oct 2019 #56

It barely survived the appellate court (2-1) Polybius Oct 2019 #67

Not necessarily - it's not automatic StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #16

Can either party appeal to SCOTUS Fiendish Thingy Oct 2019 #25

No need for the House to appeal at this point since they prevailed StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #30

Yes, I was wondering why would the Supreme Court even take up this case? There doesn't seem to... SWBTATTReg Oct 2019 #31

I'll be surprised if the Supreme Court took the case StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #47

I was very, very surprised when they granted cert in Bush v. Gore, The Velveteen Ocelot Oct 2019 #51

But if they lose an En Banc vote...? Nt Fiendish Thingy Oct 2019 #37

If there's an en banc, whoever loses can appeal, but there's no guarantee the SCt will take it StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #48

And the sole dissenting Judge...? Grins Oct 2019 #62

That's what I was just thinking. I guess we all know how THAT will turn out. Texin Oct 2019 #22

and on to the supreme court, where i'm sure justice will be... aw sh*t.... unblock Oct 2019 #5

Time frame? bluestarone Oct 2019 #10

there's some urgency to the situation, so i would hope not that long. unblock Oct 2019 #11

Stuff like this they do immediately. PoindexterOglethorpe Oct 2019 #32

"immediately" in supreme court time scale can mean a month or few. unblock Oct 2019 #36

US v Nixon - three weeks jberryhill Oct 2019 #43

Bush v Gore was four weeks. PoindexterOglethorpe Oct 2019 #44

oh dear please let's hope the time frame is the only similarity with that case.... unblock Oct 2019 #45

If SCOTUS backs Trump, that's a huge issue for 2020, especially Senate bigbrother05 Oct 2019 #19

Agree.... this could turn out to be really important. NoMoreRepugs Oct 2019 #24

SCOTUS backs Trump means SCOTUS goes rogue. Were are finished as a nation of laws. Pepsidog Oct 2019 #33

We will need the next Dem President to increase the number of justices. wasupaloopa Oct 2019 #38

Absolutely or impeach Kavenaugh for his lying under oath. Not about sex assault but stupid stuff Pepsidog Oct 2019 #40

YES, and thank you for saying that! K&R, nt. druidity33 Oct 2019 #63

AWESOME news! bluestarone Oct 2019 #6

That's a big NYET for Trump underpants Oct 2019 #7

K&R Zoonart Oct 2019 #13

Huge win malaise Oct 2019 #14

This is a BFD StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #15

Glad you're here to explain the importance of some of these decisions. Mike 03 Oct 2019 #29

This is NOT good news Trumpdumper Oct 2019 #17

Definitely need another McCain moment. (like the thumbs down) bluestarone Oct 2019 #23

crossing my fingers and toes. riversedge Oct 2019 #27

A win is a win - and this is a win. A big one StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #49

I bet this is the reason trump wanted to pack the courts. calimary Oct 2019 #18

finally!! subana Oct 2019 #20

hand it over bdamomma Oct 2019 #21

woohoo, yippee, hooray iluvtennis Oct 2019 #26

He was right! So much winning! n/t Bromwell Oct 2019 #28

Hand them over Donnie!! SummerSnow Oct 2019 #34

Confusion comes from NY case dealing with the same issues, but I think NY is a state court matter on Pepsidog Oct 2019 #35

NY case was a federal district court case StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #50

See there's the confusion factor. I thought NY case was Letitia James NY AG who subpoenaed His tax Pepsidog Oct 2019 #57

It it is confusing, isn't it? StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #61

Ok. That makes sense now it was Vance. Thanks for clearing that up. Pepsidog Oct 2019 #64

That was very helpful. Thanks. nt blaze Oct 2019 #65

This message was self-deleted by its author StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #60

Trump judge's dissent is 'extraordinary' dalton99a Oct 2019 #39

Correction: Big win for the country, big win for the rule of law and big win for democracy The Liberal Lion Oct 2019 #41

YAY!!! BlancheSplanchnik Oct 2019 #54

That didn't take long dlk Oct 2019 #59

I don't think they'll take the case. Roberts doesn't want his court to appear biased, and if he napi21 Oct 2019 #68