The Rule of Four + A Governor or AG = Fatherless/Motherless Marriages Reheard?

[Silhouette]

What is the 'rule of four"?

Where it takes only four Justices in the SCOTUS to vote to take up and Hear (or Rehear) a case.

In this example it likely would be Scalia, Thomas, Alito & Roberts. The case would be essentially about if the June 26, 2015 Opinion was illegal based on the mandatory recusal that Ginsburg and Kagan defied, re: Caperton v Massey Coal 2009 where it was found that any judge many not show a single atom of obvious bias towards or against a particular set of litigants, or the case has to be reheard.

Thank you- I have been wondering all of this time what the hell you were saying.

Would you like me to post a separate thread on just exactly how the "rule of four" works in SCOTUS? Just to refresh your memory?

Sure- go for it- I am always amused by your babbling OP's.

So then are you clear that Alito, Thomas, Roberts & Scalia could vote to take up a case such as this one? Not one of your in-pocket Justices permission would be needed?

 

[Syriusly]

What is the 'rule of four"?

Where it takes only four Justices in the SCOTUS to vote to take up and Hear (or Rehear) a case.

In this example it likely would be Scalia, Thomas, Alito & Roberts. The case would be essentially about if the June 26, 2015 Opinion was illegal based on the mandatory recusal that Ginsburg and Kagan defied, re: Caperton v Massey Coal 2009 where it was found that any judge many not show a single atom of obvious bias towards or against a particular set of litigants, or the case has to be reheard.

Thank you- I have been wondering all of this time what the hell you were saying.

Would you like me to post a separate thread on just exactly how the "rule of four" works in SCOTUS? Just to refresh your memory?

Sure- go for it- I am always amused by your babbling OP's.

So then are you clear that Alito, Thomas, Roberts & Scalia could vote to take up a case such as this one? Not one of your in-pocket Justices permission would be needed?

Oh I am quite clear on how the system works- I just didn't understand your babbling about the 'rule of four'.

Now- can you provide any examples where a sitting Supreme Court has reversed its own decision?

 

[Silhouette]

.. can you provide any examples where a sitting Supreme Court has reversed its own decision?

....hmmm...let's just say the whole gay-marriage thing has ushered in a lot of historical firsts. We'll leave it at that for now.

 

[Skylar]

.. can you provide any examples where a sitting Supreme Court has reversed its own decision?

....hmmm...let's just say the whole gay-marriage thing has ushered in a lot of historical firsts. We'll leave it at that for now.

Translation: your latest round of bargaining as a coping mechanism has never happened in the history of the United States.

Ever.