Courts value finality. They value it because it reduces caseloads, and puts less pressure on them to intervene, and lessens the public perception that they are political actors. You see that everywhere in our justice system. Elections are no different. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15342484323761015051&q=Herrera+v.+Collins&hl=en&as_sdt=80006&as_vis=1 …
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
That is exactly the opposite of what Scalia wrote. He said new evidence shouldn't be considered after the final judgment, even if it's exculpatory.
- Show replies
-
-
-
We want a incredibly conservative judiciary! Wait not like that!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not a lawyer, but this opinion does not apply if that evidence is related to criminal actions on the part of prosecution or law enforcement, correct? Police fabricate evidence or lie under oath; prosecution knowing withholds evidence or colluded with police...
-
And in any event, new evidence would require a new trial if the case were compelling. Exoneration would not happen simply based on the claim.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
How so?
- Show replies
-
-
-
1. These conservatives aren’t conservative. At all. 2. They have absolutely no idea what makes a conservative judge conservative. 3. Trump doesn’t understand this either. 4. See point 1.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.