Good piece by @MichaelMcGough3 on Sanders' "Citizens United" litmus test: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-bernie-sanders-supreme-court-citizens-united-20160415-story.html …pic.twitter.com/t758CHz5FE
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
@jujueyeball I don't think RBG was lying in her statement that McGough quoted, for example.
@chrisgeidner I would trust her less if it was true that she was 100% forthright in the hearing
@chrisgeidner @jujueyeball Any good lawyer has read Citizens United and formed an opinion.
@ZaraLock @chrisgeidner @jujueyeball "Any good lawyer" will have a helluva time w/ that whole Advice & Consent thing if predecided, though.
@segmentis @ZaraLock @chrisgeidner probably, and isnt that too bad? Surely there is an alternative to agreeing to fake it together.
@jujueyeball @segmentis @ZaraLock If a lawyer thinks they know exactly where they'd stand in a specific case in a 9-judge tribunal before...
@jujueyeball @segmentis @ZaraLock ... joining that court, I would have serious doubts about their understanding of the Supreme Court.
@segmentis That's why I think your statements, @ZaraLock and @jujueyeball, don't reflect the reality of SCOTUS appts. It's more complicated.
@segmentis @ZaraLock @jujueyeball You're not bound by past precedent, beyond stare decisis. You're also lifetime tenured & one of nine.
@chrisgeidner @segmentis @ZaraLock I'll blog about this bc medium's limitations are stark though I don't doubt i could learn a lot
@chrisgeidner not sure that's the end of the world or even bad. Certain actions are prejudged by existing law. But a nono for judges?
@jujueyeball There can be "settled law," but there is no "certain law," if you're the Supreme Court, so, yay.
@chrisgeidner it's a deeply arbitrary fetishization of process that I am okay with someone's honestly rejecting on certain certain issues
@jujueyeball But, the law is what they say it is — & it's very fact specific — & decisions change once you have that lifetime appointment.
@jujueyeball So, I'd argue its neither arbitrary nor a fetishization. I'd also argue it's not process, but, rather, very substantive.
@chrisgeidner rules in a confirmation process that include pretending you don't have opinions is silly! who knows how theyd influence cases?
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.