Candidates, nominees from president republican president s have learned a lot about how to deal with the hearings. When you heard kavanaugh say as he did, talking about the parties to the case that theyre Flesh And Blood Human Beings and we need to have empathy for them and real world consequences of the court are very important. As a political matter, great stuff. A legal matter, its nonsense. Were youre an Appellate Judge and an issue comes before you, the issue is not the parties. Youre to resolve the legal issues. Its a purely legal matter. The parties may happen to be the case that they pick to do that. Now, obviously its as well as a human being to say you care about the parties, yes, you should, but thats smart to say that. Bork said when he was asked about why he wanted to be on the court back then, he said among other things, he said it was an intellectual feast. His critics got all over that. To him its a theoretical matter
kavanaugh. One is cory booker and kamala harris. No
Hyunjoo Ungkap Perundungan oleh Anggota April: Aku Tinggal 24 Jam Bersama Para Pelaku
liputan6.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from liputan6.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Капремонт инженерных сетей в Саяногорске вызвал сильный интерес в Екатеринбурге - Агентство Информационных Сообщений
vg-news.ru - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from vg-news.ru Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Госстрой с начала года оформил 566 лицензий и 1,5 тыс квалификационных сертификатов — Tazabek
tazabek.kg - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from tazabek.kg Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
the rules of legal interpretation are rules of common sense. yes. okay. all right. so it just doesn t make common sense to me that we would throw an agency out like that or even the head of it. you re basically putting your judgment in the place of congress. but i didn t throw the agency out. i said the agency could continue operating as it was. the only change would be instead of being for-cause removal, it would be at-will removal. there was a judge, not me, on our court who said because of that constitutional flaw, the whole agency had to stop operating. i specifically and explicitly rejected that as a remedy and said, no, the agency can continue operating and doing its important consumer functions. let s go to one where you actually did throw out the rules. that s net neutrality, right. that is, in my mind, a bedrock of a free and open internet, allowing consumers and small