Friendly forums for passionate Dems!
More than 94 million posts since 2001
Home Latest Greatest Videos Forums Hide ads Join up!
Home Latest Greatest
Videos Forums Help
Hide ads Join up!
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court throws out ...»Reply #18
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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

In reply to the discussion: Supreme Court throws out North Carolina redistricting ruling [View all]

cstanleytech

(28,454 posts)
18. Aye and what sucks if they did impeach Trump and Pence the next in line is Paul Ryan followed by
Reply to brooklynite (Reply #14)
Mon Jun 5, 2017, 07:31 PM
Jun 2017

an extensive list of other repugnant Repugnants.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Supreme Court throws out North Carolina redistricting ruling [View all] DonViejo Jun 2017 OP
The Supreme Court Upheld a Ruling Against North Carolina's Redistricting, says AP/Time. elleng Jun 2017 #1
Reuters article sortof confusing - One from AP (@Time) is better BumRushDaShow Jun 2017 #2
So help, what does it mean??? and thanks. eom a kennedy Jun 2017 #3
USSC upheld the ruling that districts were gerrymandered, but sent redraw order back to lower court CousinIT Jun 2017 #4
Yep sounds like that to me, as well. Volaris Jun 2017 #7
Not whether they need to be redrawn but by when and what happens in the meantime onenote Jun 2017 #8
Reads to me like "yes, they're gerrymandered, but you can't have special elections in 2017 ... muriel_volestrangler Jun 2017 #5
Ya sounds like that. cstanleytech Jun 2017 #6
That was blatant partisanship. Ligyron Jun 2017 #9
HUGE impact of this opinion. Not that they can't order special elections, but that they need to JudyM Jun 2017 #11
Sounds like the court said ... aggiesal Jun 2017 #10
This message was self-deleted by its author JudyM Jun 2017 #12
They didnt say that the ruling more seems like one of cstanleytech Jun 2017 #16
Do you believe that NC Republicans will do the right thing? ... aggiesal Jun 2017 #19
If they had a choice, no of course not but the courts will I assume be watching them very carefully cstanleytech Jun 2017 #23
"Justice Neil Gorsuch, who joined the bench in April Hortensis Jun 2017 #15
They did not interfere with the finding, but with the remedy (special election). Yo_Mama Jun 2017 #20
It means that the lower court may rule that special elections are necessary, but it must do a Yo_Mama Jun 2017 #21
! This opinion shows how the Supremes will likely evaluate whether to hold new elections for POTUS JudyM Jun 2017 #13
The Supreme Court WILL NOT RULE on holding new President Elections... brooklynite Jun 2017 #14
Aye and what sucks if they did impeach Trump and Pence the next in line is Paul Ryan followed by cstanleytech Jun 2017 #18
This message was self-deleted by its author cstanleytech Jun 2017 #17
Uh, no. Just no. This has nothing to do with US presidential elections. Yo_Mama Jun 2017 #22
You forgot your sarcasm thingy. GulfCoast66 Jun 2017 #24
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court throws out ...»Reply #18
Home | Latest Discussions | Greatest Discussions | Latest Videos | All Forums

About | Copyright | Privacy | Terms of service | Contact

In Memoriam

© 2001 - 2026 Democratic Underground, LLC. Thank you for visiting.