The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Those wonderful Supremes (17 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2~3..15~16~17 [Next]
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
OK, I'll admit that I don't have a lot of knowledge about Supreme court procedures or that I have paid a lot of attention to previous cases. I was kind of surprised when it turned out that oral arguments on the Affordable Health Care Act were only going to cover 3 days. One day on whether or not it's actually a tax and they can rule on it, one day on the individual mandate, and one day on whether or not they would have to strike the entire law if they struck down the individual mandate.

I guess I'm used to seeing big criminal cases last months and months. I expected arguments on this to cover a much longer period. Now that the arguments are over, I understand that a ruling won't be given until sometime in June. So what gives? Is this normal? And if so, what goes on regarding their decision between now and June?

Educate me.
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
I'm also curious. Is there a corallary to the Supreme Court in other countries?
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
You should read "Gideons Trumpet". It's very interesting and accessible to the layman. It gives you an idea of how the court actually works, or is supposed to work. The lawyers and others here can probably answer your specific questions, but I always liked that book for the way it described some of the inner workings of the court, and the entire process involving a landmark case.

There are probably newer and better books, but in general, Gideons Trumpet is a good intro and clears up a lot of misconceptions etc. And it's a good read.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Brief excerpt from the link below. Much more at the site.

http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResou......res.aspx

By law, the U.S. Supreme Court's term begins on the first Monday in October and goes through the Sunday before the first Monday in October of the following year. The Court is, typically, in recess from late June/early July until the first Monday in October.

The Court hears oral arguments in cases from October through April. From October through December, arguments are heard during the first two weeks of each month. From January through April, arguments are heard on the last two weeks of each month. During each two-week session, oral arguments are heard on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays only (unless the Court directs otherwise).

Oral arguments are open to the public. Typically, two cases are heard each day, beginning at 10 a.m. Each case is allotted an hour for arguments. During this time, lawyers for each party have a half hour to make their best legal case to the Justices. Most of this time, however, is spent answering the Justices' questions. The Justices tend to view oral arguments, not as a forum for the lawyers to rehash the merits of the case as found in their briefs, but to answer any questions that the Justices may have developed while reading their briefs.

The Solicitor General usually argues cases in which the U.S. Government is a party. If the U.S. Government is not a party, the Solicitor still may be allotted time to express the Government's interests in the case.

During oral arguments, each side has approximately 30 minutes to present its case, however, attorneys are not required to use the entire time.

All opinions of the Court are, typically, be handed down by the last day of the Court's term (the day in late June/early July when the Court recesses for the summer). With the exception of this deadline, there are no rules concerning when decisions must be released. Typically, decisions that are unanimous are released sooner than those that have concurring and dissenting opinions. While some unanimous decisions are handed down as early as December, some controversial opinions, even if heard in October, may not be handed down until the last day of the term.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2012-03-28 17:03, rockwall wrote:

I understand that a ruling won't be given until sometime in June.

I expect to be at an international health insurance industry meeting in New Orleans this June. Should be an interesting meeting.

Quote:
On 2012-03-28 17:04, rockwall wrote:
I'm also curious. Is there a corallary to the Supreme Court in other countries?

Canada certainly has one. Ditto the UK. I'm gonna guess that any nation with a legal system based on British common law (as in Canada and the U.S.) will have a Supreme Court.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On 2012-03-28 17:32, Marlin1894 wrote:
You should read "Gideons Trumpet". It's very interesting and accessible to the layman. It gives you an idea of how the court actually works, or is supposed to work. The lawyers and others here can probably answer your specific questions, but I always liked that book for the way it described some of the inner workings of the court, and the entire process involving a landmark case.

There are probably newer and better books, but in general, Gideons Trumpet is a good intro and clears up a lot of misconceptions etc. And it's a good read.


It looks good and is available on Kindle, so I'll probably download it and give it a read!
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Or you can watch the movie based on the book.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080789/
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Bob1Dog
View Profile
Inner circle
Wife: It's me or this houseful of
1159 Posts

Profile of Bob1Dog
I heard one of the SCOTUS justices quoted today in response to a Solicitor General's argument, Scalia or CJ Roberts, "You don't expect us to read all twenty seven hundred pages, do you?" Certainly indicating a time constraint.
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about? Smile

My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Of course they (or their clerks) will read it, together with the voluminous briefs submitted by nearly thirty parties to the case.

The comment "You don't expect us to read all twenty seen hundred pages, do you?" was clearly a facetious reference to the same comment that was made by members of Congress while the bill was being debated. Sardonic humor is not unusual in many Justices.
Bob1Dog
View Profile
Inner circle
Wife: It's me or this houseful of
1159 Posts

Profile of Bob1Dog
I see.
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about? Smile

My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1191 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 00:03, mastermindreader wrote:
Of course they (or their clerks) will read it, together with the voluminous briefs submitted by nearly thirty parties to the case.

The comment "You don't expect us to read all twenty seen hundred pages, do you?" was clearly a facetious reference to the same comment that was made by members of Congress while the bill was being debated. Sardonic humor is not unusual in many Justices.


I'd be amazingly funny if I had a worldwide audience and a job I couldn't be fired from
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 02:10, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 00:03, mastermindreader wrote:
Of course they (or their clerks) will read it, together with the voluminous briefs submitted by nearly thirty parties to the case.

The comment "You don't expect us to read all twenty seen hundred pages, do you?" was clearly a facetious reference to the same comment that was made by members of Congress while the bill was being debated. Sardonic humor is not unusual in many Justices.

I'd be amazingly scary if I had a worldwide audience and a job I couldn't be fired from

Fixed that for you.
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
So I've learned a bit more about the operation of those wonderful Supremes.

Apparantly, before hereing the case, they have already reviewed all the briefs, etc. about the case and the Oral Arguments are more of an opportunity for the justices to ask questions of the two sides. A few days after the Oral Arguments, the justices will gather and vote, which seems to have happened on March 30. At that time, they go around the table, starting with the most senior justice, giving their vote with some explanation of why they voted thus. It doesn't appear that they actually argue the merits of the case amongst themselves at this time. The most senior justice of the side with the most votes assigns someone to write the opinion while the most senior justice of the other side assigns someone to write the dissenting opinion.

Rarely, but occasionally, a justice will change their mind as they review the opinion that is being written so although the vote has been taken, it could change. I don't know if it's true, but I've heard it said that the Supreme Court is the one branch of government that doesn't leak information prior to releasing the final results. Although a vote has been taken, it is not expected that the opinion will be released until the last day they are in session or very close to that towards the end of June.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
It'll be interesting for us observers to watch the fallout no matter which way they decide. Even moreso for myself if, as I mentioned before, I happen to be participating at a health care conference in the U.S. when it happens.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Chance
View Profile
Inner circle
1385 Posts

Profile of Chance
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 09:43, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 02:10, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 00:03, mastermindreader wrote:
Of course they (or their clerks) will read it, together with the voluminous briefs submitted by nearly thirty parties to the case.

The comment "You don't expect us to read all twenty seen hundred pages, do you?" was clearly a facetious reference to the same comment that was made by members of Congress while the bill was being debated. Sardonic humor is not unusual in many Justices.

I'd be amazingly scary if I had a worldwide audience and a job I couldn't be fired from

Fixed that for you.


NO!!! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!!

Or maybe you can, it's just that I'm not allowed to.

Gee whiz you guys, so many complicated rules to remember...
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4930 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2012-04-03 16:45, rockwall wrote:
So I've learned a bit more about the operation of those wonderful Supremes.

... It doesn't appear that they actually argue the merits of the case amongst themselves at this time...

Do they ever actually schedule a time to do that? Sad if they don't.
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2012-04-03 17:26, Chance wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 09:43, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 02:10, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-03-29 00:03, mastermindreader wrote:
Of course they (or their clerks) will read it, together with the voluminous briefs submitted by nearly thirty parties to the case.

The comment "You don't expect us to read all twenty seen hundred pages, do you?" was clearly a facetious reference to the same comment that was made by members of Congress while the bill was being debated. Sardonic humor is not unusual in many Justices.

I'd be amazingly scary if I had a worldwide audience and a job I couldn't be fired from

Fixed that for you.

NO!!! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!!

Or maybe you can, it's just that I'm not allowed to.

Gee whiz you guys, so many complicated rules to remember...

I did it in March; the rule changed on Sunday.

;)
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On 2012-04-03 17:37, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-04-03 16:45, rockwall wrote:
So I've learned a bit more about the operation of those wonderful Supremes.

... It doesn't appear that they actually argue the merits of the case amongst themselves at this time...

Do they ever actually schedule a time to do that? Sad if they don't.


Not formally I don't think. My understanding is that they discuss it informally amongst themselves even before the Oral Arguments. One justice may call another justice to discuss a point.

Pretty fascinating how it all actually works and I'm actually a bit embarrassed that I didn't know more about the procedures before this.
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Quote:
On 2012-04-03 17:26, Chance wrote:
...

NO!!! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!!!

Or maybe you can, it's just that I'm not allowed to.

Gee whiz you guys, so many complicated rules to remember...


There's only one rule you need to remember Chance. If YOU do it, it's against the rules! Smile
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-04-03 17:37, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-04-03 16:45, rockwall wrote:
So I've learned a bit more about the operation of those wonderful Supremes.

... It doesn't appear that they actually argue the merits of the case amongst themselves at this time...

Do they ever actually schedule a time to do that? Sad if they don't.


That kind of argument takes place constantly during the opinion writing process in which justices often take apart each others arguments and sometimes rewrite their own based on what the others have written.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Those wonderful Supremes (17 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2~3..15~16~17 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.18 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL