Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 7
No. of Recommendations: 5
...or how the SCOTUS can make any decision they like without having to justify or explain it in any way. But it's not setting precedent [eye roll].
I think we can dispense with the false notion that Roberts is a 'moderate'.
No. of Recommendations: 4
I think we can dispense with the false notion that Roberts is a 'moderate'.
In principle, that shouldn't even be a factor. They're supposed to interpret the author's intent as it applies to modern times. Instead, they appear to be hyper-partisan. And a good way to do that is using the shadow docket, evidently.
No. of Recommendations: 3
In principle, that shouldn't even be a factor. They're supposed to interpret the author's intent as it applies to modern times. Instead, they appear to be hyper-partisan. And a good way to do that is using the shadow docket, evidently.
Did you ever ask yourself why the shadow docket came about? What might have precipitated that?
No. of Recommendations: 10
Did you ever ask yourself why the shadow docket came about? What might have precipitated that?
That was explicitly covered in the link I provided.
A quick precis would be that it was to address exigent circumstances. One example given was a prisoner is to be executed, but has a challenge before the Court. You can't un-execute him, so a temporary stay is issued via the shadow docket until the Court can take up the full merits.
None of its recent usage even comes close to exigent.
No. of Recommendations: 3
None of its recent usage even comes close to exigent.
Sure about that? The EPA was all set to effectively cost companies billions of dollars even though they knew they were likely to lose in court, a blatant abuse of power.
