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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Laelth

(32,017 posts)

4. I agree.

Reply to shockey80 (Original post)

Tue May 12, 2020, 01:58 PM

May 2020

The Court should have allowed the earlier, Appeals Court rulings to stand.

But once the SCOTUS is in session, it’s pointless to ask why the SCOTUS decided to hear the case. The question is moot at that point.

-Laelth

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If I were arguing the case before the supreme court, I would have asked this question. [View all] shockey80 May 2020 OP

Not sure to what you're referring, but elleng May 2020 #1

My understanding is the supreme Court doesn't take every case that has already been settled before uponit7771 May 2020 #3

The SCOTUS is required to hear only a handful of types of cases. Laelth May 2020 #6

Because They Want To Overturn That Precedent sfstaxprep May 2020 #2

I agree. Laelth May 2020 #4

If it is "settled law", cite the Supreme Court case. n/t PoliticAverse May 2020 #5

Jones v. Clinton Laelth May 2020 #7

U.S. vs. Nixon....ordered Nixon to turn over 'his' tapes. spanone May 2020 #11

That case concerned "executive privledge". PoliticAverse May 2020 #13

I don't think you understand the concept of settled law. onenote May 2020 #8

Nothing is settled law, as to the supreme court. Ms. Toad May 2020 #9

True. n/t Laelth May 2020 #10

I think you mean the case SHOULDN'T have made it to the supreme court. You said should. BComplex May 2020 #12