|Re: Roberts strikes again. -- Russ Walden||Post Reply||Top of thread||Forum|
Posted by: TEEBONE ® |
Author Profile Mail author Edit
There are four justices, absent Roberts, who one would bet would vote to hear the case. I see no recusals from the voting.
It's been reported that the sheriff changed the permit-issue policy, which, if true, would render the challenge moot.
Since that was the core issue of the lawsuit, given the bent of the Court to keep certiorari hearings as narrowly focused a possible, they probably waltzed past the broader secondary complaint about the state's "may issue" law.
I suspect that was the factor at work here.
LIBERTY HAS NO EXPIRATION DATEDemocrats wouldn't buy a clue if it was government subsidized.
Modified by TEEBONE at Tue, Nov 06, 2018, 13:12:39
|Post Reply | Recommend | Alert||Where am I? Original Top of thread||Previous | Next | Current page|
|Replies to this message|