tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post3643868792795307042..comments2024-03-29T03:57:26.974-04:00Comments on Grim's Hall: "Counsel, do you have any other arguments?"Grimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-52356400679433548652012-05-01T10:08:50.032-04:002012-05-01T10:08:50.032-04:00Bill, Bill, you old dinosaur you. What the law sa...Bill, Bill, you old dinosaur you. What the law says? That's an awfully primitive way of looking at it. How does the law make you feel? More to the point, how does it make the electorate feel? Sadly, the latter arguments play very well to many judges, by the way. I'm only surprised that so many leftist Supreme Court Justices are still committed to applying a more rigorous standard. It gives me hope.Texan99https://www.blogger.com/profile/10479561573903660086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-21505002846106927282012-04-30T03:48:33.886-04:002012-04-30T03:48:33.886-04:00This was a real embarrassment. Our taxes are payin...<i>This was a real embarrassment. Our taxes are paying for these guys to concoct these arguments and then make them.</i><br /><br />The biggest embarrassment is Eric Holder, who condemned the law out of hand and committed DoJ to contesting it -- then admitted he had neither read the law nor could give a brief synopsis of what it actually said.BillThttp://www.thedonovan.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-50501985900911678232012-04-27T08:54:36.493-04:002012-04-27T08:54:36.493-04:00True believers (of all stripes) are willing to fal...True believers (of all stripes) are willing to fall on their swords for The Cause. And it's entirely possible he honestly felt it was so self-evident that this law was unconstitutional (delusional though we might consider that position to be) that it wouldn't be very hard to make the case. But true wisdom includes understanding that just because you see things in a certain light does not mean everyone else does. And if you're going to present your case to anyone else, prepare for the worst case scenario. Verilli did not.MikeDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-71699941986367299622012-04-27T03:06:32.539-04:002012-04-27T03:06:32.539-04:00"His choice here is to defend the government&...<i>"His choice here is to defend the government's position as well as he can, or resign."</i><br /><br />Then if he were wise, looking at the arguments they had before them to make, he should have resigned. What's the benefit of taking the fall for the administration in a hopeless battle? There's not even some morale boost to be gained.douglashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17261739259295914188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-56965421555018534812012-04-26T19:19:14.740-04:002012-04-26T19:19:14.740-04:00Analogising to simpler crimes does often make the ...Analogising to simpler crimes does often make the whole deal clearer, and I thank Scalia for doing that.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-76803260576495630992012-04-26T18:50:35.641-04:002012-04-26T18:50:35.641-04:00The whole argument can be viewed here; it's l...The whole argument can be viewed <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/11-182.pdf" rel="nofollow"> <b>here</b></a>; it's laughable or sad, depending on your perspective on the immigration question.<br /><br />I wouldn't blame Verilli, though; he's dealt a bad hand. His choice here is to defend the government's position as well as he can, or resign.<br /><br />Still, the Supremes haven't issued their ruling, and a 4-4 split upholds the Federal government's position. It's not time to cheer.<br /><br />Eric HinesE Hineshttp://aplebessite.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-46367930129397769312012-04-26T16:00:17.703-04:002012-04-26T16:00:17.703-04:00That's gotta sting.That's gotta sting.MikeDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-2421959725472500702012-04-26T15:02:18.614-04:002012-04-26T15:02:18.614-04:00If this is the Feds' legal A-team, I hate to i...If this is the Feds' legal A-team, I hate to imagine what their minor-league attorneys do. This is embarrassing, as Grim said. And it is probably not how someone wants to be immortalized in law-school textbooks.<br /><br />LittleRed1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-11748262932608732812012-04-26T14:49:05.635-04:002012-04-26T14:49:05.635-04:00DOJ is having quite a long run at the Kabuki Theat...DOJ is having quite a long run at the Kabuki Theater. <br /><br />Sadly we can not throw tomatoes at some of the actors, but we can <i>get the hook</i> after these latter day vaudevillians. <br /><br />193 days and a wake up seems like an eternity...bthunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15789441349826379510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-41586460624348376412012-04-26T14:43:07.551-04:002012-04-26T14:43:07.551-04:00This was a real embarrassment. Our taxes are payi...This was a real embarrassment. Our taxes are paying for these guys to concoct these arguments and then make them. We'll be paying for their retirement, too (and not soon enough, since we are stuck with having to do it).<br /><br />Unlike states with regard to the federal government, cities and counties are creatures of state authority (at least in Georgia they are, and I can't see why it would be otherwise elsewhere unless a city got special protections written into the state constitution). There's no reason for the Federal government to involve itself in a 'conflict' between the state and a subordinate organization that the state can dissolve if it wants to do so. We can just have the state police take over the county sheriff or local PD, and they can run the immigration checks.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.com