"Friday's ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco .................."
no need to read further.
the 9th circuit is like that mushroom eating uncle that pops into a family discussion ranting about how his time machine needs more petchole fuel. everyone just lets him talk but no one really takes him seriously.....kinda like the ADD kid with down syndrome.
"Friday's ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco .................."
no need to read further.
the 9th circuit is like that mushroom eating uncle that pops into a family discussion ranting about how his time machine needs more petchole fuel. everyone just lets him talk but no one really takes him seriously.....kinda like the ADD kid with down syndrome.
The Ninth Circuit generally has a liberal reputation, though its judges span the gamut from reliably liberal to moderate to socially and fiscally conservative. Like all federal judges, judges on the Ninth Circuit serve for life, and as a result their decisions may diverge sharply from the viewpoint of the president that nominated them. Accordingly, efforts to categorize judges based on their past political affiliation or nominating president are often fruitless. For example, the 2002 majority opinion in Newdow v. United States Congress, 292 F.3d 597 (9th Cir. 2002), rev'd sub nom. Elk Grove Unified Sch. Dist. v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004), holding that the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, was written by Senior Circuit Judge Alfred T. Goodwin, a Richard M. Nixon appointee.
Hmmm, a Nixon appointee? Also, the Supreme Court overturned, but it should be noted that they overturned on a technicality.
Also:
In Raich v. Ashcroft, 352 F.3d 1222 (9th Cir. 2003), rev'd sub nom. Gonzales v. Raich, No. 03-1454, 125 S.Ct. (2005), a cancer patient sued the federal government, seeking to prevent it from seizing her supply of medical marijuana under the federal Controlled Substances Act.....In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court disagreed with this analysis, adhering instead to a 1942 case, Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942), in which the Court held that cultivation of wheat for personal consumption could be subject to a federal production quota even though the crop never entered the stream of commerce. Interestingly, the three dissentersvoting to uphold the Ninth Circuitwere Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Clarence Thomas, considered to be two of the most conservative members of the Court, as well as Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, considered to be a moderate.
Huh...Rehnquist and Thomas agreed with this supposedly over-the-top liberal court?
The Ninth Circuit's willingness to venture into uncharted legal waters has been said to lead to a high reversal rate by the Supreme Court. A CNN.com article discussing the 2002 Newdow ruling stated that "[t]he 9th Circuit is the most overturned appeals court in the country." This assertion is disputed by legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, who found that the Ninth Circuit's reversal rate was near the median of those of the other circuits.
"Friday's ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco .................."
no need to read further.
the 9th circuit is like that mushroom eating uncle that pops into a family discussion ranting about how his time machine needs more petchole fuel. everyone just lets him talk but no one really takes him seriously.....kinda like the ADD kid with down syndrome.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.