Post #30774 by albaby1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 2

As a non-lawyer and citizen, it annoys me that the judge is putting off his ruling. I don't see how the election could have any impact on this ruling. Make your ruling and then toss that into the pile of things the parties need to respond to regarding the election.

Generally speaking, if a party requests the opportunity to make a legal argument, due process means listening to that argument before rejecting it.

Courts will require parties to make their arguments in a timely fashion, of course. But if a significant event occurs that neither party has previously had an opportunity to fully brief, it's pretty much basic due process to give a party the chance to argue that it has an impact on the case. In this case, since both parties agreed that the defendant becoming the President-elect was a significant event, it would have probably been a denial of due process not to give the parties a week to brief the issue.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (12)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.