|
whatsgrimace
Stranger


Registered: 02/03/08
Posts: 5,239
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: koods]
#21129358 - 01/16/15 01:46 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
This thread sucks.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,408
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: whatsgrimace]
#21129359 - 01/16/15 01:47 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Thanks for the input, sport.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: koods]
#21129424 - 01/16/15 02:05 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: There is a difference between a trial court judge and an appellate court judge. It is entirely within the purview of an appellate court to consider whether a law is just or not.
Example?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: koods]
#21129429 - 01/16/15 02:05 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Thanks for the input, sport.
He is always helpful.
--------------------
|
whatsgrimace
Stranger


Registered: 02/03/08
Posts: 5,239
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: koods]
#21129435 - 01/16/15 02:06 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Thanks for the input, sport.
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,408
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: zappaisgod]
#21129462 - 01/16/15 02:18 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: There is a difference between a trial court judge and an appellate court judge. It is entirely within the purview of an appellate court to consider whether a law is just or not.
Example?
http://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/File/Media/Education/41%20Roles%20Responsibilities%20Appellate%20Judges12-2010.pdf
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
whatsgrimace
Stranger


Registered: 02/03/08
Posts: 5,239
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: koods]
#21129478 - 01/16/15 02:23 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Interesting article there, koods.
--------------------
|
elax420
Anal Destroyer


Registered: 10/16/12
Posts: 15,536
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: zappaisgod]
#21129491 - 01/16/15 02:27 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Do you know that the Justice Department is tasked with enforcing laws? A judge should not be allowed to refuse to prosecute a law just because he/she disagrees with it. If the do not enforce the law there is no law.
FYI the DOJ is a part of the Executive branch. It is comprised of US Prosecutors and Law Enforcement (feds)
DOJ≠Judiciary
you actually just described the intention of the SCOTUS. If a law is deemed unconstitutional it cannot by law be enforced. Also the court doesn’t necisarily have to strike a law down to make it unenforceable. I forgot the example but in the opinion the justices can state whether or not the case be used as precedence. For instance they can say in that in this specific case the law violated the defendants/pursuant rights and therefore the decision made by the lessor court is voided.
Or the opposite and the lower court is affirmed.
A common misconception about SCOTUS is that they try to waves, and thats rarely true (given the shear number of cases in their docket) Scotus is pretty boring for the most part unless you are really into law, and when its not boring you are going to hear about it and people are going to lose their shit over decisions.
Quote:
koods said: There is a difference between a trial court judge and an appellate court judge. It is entirely within the purview of an appellate court to consider whether a law is just or not.
And this dude knows his shit a bit better than i originally thougQuote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: There is a difference between a trial court judge and an appellate court judge. It is entirely within the purview of an appellate court to consider whether a law is just or not.
Example?
Heres a graphic used to teach how the courts are organized.
Edited by elax420 (01/16/15 02:28 PM)
|
elax420
Anal Destroyer


Registered: 10/16/12
Posts: 15,536
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: elax420]
#21129503 - 01/16/15 02:31 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Federal Judges are appointed by the President approved by Congress (Judicial courtesy, means the president appoint whoever the relevant Senator wants)
And then the rest varies state by state. Every judge wants a better appointment so its typically a bad idea to make waves.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: koods]
#21129524 - 01/16/15 02:36 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
koods said: There is a difference between a trial court judge and an appellate court judge. It is entirely within the purview of an appellate court to consider whether a law is just or not.
Example?
http://www.courts.state.co.us/userfiles/File/Media/Education/41%20Roles%20Responsibilities%20Appellate%20Judges12-2010.pdf
I aint seeing it
Quote:
When handling an appellate case, judges and justices must take into account: 1. The facts of the case, as set forth in the record presented on appeal; 2. Errors in the application of the laws; 3. The Colorado Constitution and the United States Constitution; 4. Statutory laws enacted by legislative bodies and legislative intent; 5. Precedents and/or persuasive authority; and 6. The lawyers’ written briefs and oral arguments.
--------------------
|
whatsgrimace
Stranger


Registered: 02/03/08
Posts: 5,239
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: zappaisgod]
#21129554 - 01/16/15 02:43 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Which is why having a case in court is confusing and raping.
--------------------
|
elax420
Anal Destroyer


Registered: 10/16/12
Posts: 15,536
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: zappaisgod]
#21129555 - 01/16/15 02:43 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Trial<Appellate<SCOTUS (which is the highest appellate court)
Trial Court Federal trial courts are called district courts. Cases are heard for the first time in a trial court. Cases only affect the people involved with the case. The two sides present evidence and witnesses, and either a judge or a jury makes a decision based on the evidence presented.
Appellate Cases can be further appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. if either party disagrees with the decision in the trial court, they can appeal, asking a higher court to review the decision.The outcome of appeals cases have the potential to affect large numbers of people, because these decisions are binding on district courts within the circuit. The two sides present evidence and witnesses, and either a judge or a jury makes a decision based on the evidence presented. No new evidence is presented, the judge(s) simply review the materials from the original trial and determine whether the lower court made the correct legal decision.
Last part is the most important Per http://www.civilrights.org/judiciary/courts/difference-trial-appellate-courts.html
|
elax420
Anal Destroyer


Registered: 10/16/12
Posts: 15,536
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: whatsgrimace]
#21129561 - 01/16/15 02:45 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
whatsgrimace said: Which is why having a case in court is confusing and raping.
Which is why good Lawyers are some of the most powerful people in the country.
You think thats bad you should see Torts. Torts is mad fucked.
|
whatsgrimace
Stranger


Registered: 02/03/08
Posts: 5,239
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: elax420]
#21129651 - 01/16/15 03:01 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Whats a torts?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: elax420]
#21129672 - 01/16/15 03:06 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
elax420 said: Trial<Appellate<SCOTUS (which is the highest appellate court)
Trial Court Federal trial courts are called district courts. Cases are heard for the first time in a trial court. Cases only affect the people involved with the case. The two sides present evidence and witnesses, and either a judge or a jury makes a decision based on the evidence presented.
Appellate Cases can be further appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. if either party disagrees with the decision in the trial court, they can appeal, asking a higher court to review the decision.The outcome of appeals cases have the potential to affect large numbers of people, because these decisions are binding on district courts within the circuit. The two sides present evidence and witnesses, and either a judge or a jury makes a decision based on the evidence presented. No new evidence is presented, the judge(s) simply review the materials from the original trial and determine whether the lower court made the correct legal decision.
Last part is the most important Per http://www.civilrights.org/judiciary/courts/difference-trial-appellate-courts.html
Still not seeing it.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 8 months
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: whatsgrimace]
#21129679 - 01/16/15 03:07 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
whatsgrimace said: Whats a torts?
A civil dispute. You broke my window, I suffered a loss, pay up bitch. That is a tort.
--------------------
|
whatsgrimace
Stranger


Registered: 02/03/08
Posts: 5,239
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: zappaisgod]
#21129742 - 01/16/15 03:21 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Ahh. Thanks for clearing that up.
--------------------
|
lowbrow
Paddy Time!!!!


Registered: 09/12/08
Posts: 9,748
Last seen: 1 day, 10 minutes
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21129771 - 01/16/15 03:26 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
challenged in courts... apparent you're only aware of one way laws can be changed
it wasnt court challenges that had marijuana legalized in colorado and washington was it? pretty sure that breaking the law did nothing there
Not directly, but indirectly, I'd say that's exactly why they were changed.
-------------------- Amanita86 said: Sui is trying to mod right now. Kinda like a newborn calf tryin ta stand fer the first time ain’t it..
|
whatsgrimace
Stranger


Registered: 02/03/08
Posts: 5,239
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: elax420]
#21129790 - 01/16/15 03:30 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
elax420 said:
Quote:
whatsgrimace said: Which is why having a case in court is confusing and raping.
Which is why good Lawyers are some of the most powerful people in the country.
You think thats bad you should see Torts. Torts is mad fucked.
My lawyer made me claim guilty of fleeing the police charge that never fucking happened.
--------------------
|
elax420
Anal Destroyer


Registered: 10/16/12
Posts: 15,536
|
Re: Supreme Court Considers Whether A Sock Is Drug Paraphernalia [Re: whatsgrimace]
#21129943 - 01/16/15 04:04 PM (9 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
elax420 said: Trial<Appellate<SCOTUS (which is the highest appellate court)
Trial Court Federal trial courts are called district courts. Cases are heard for the first time in a trial court. Cases only affect the people involved with the case. The two sides present evidence and witnesses, and either a judge or a jury makes a decision based on the evidence presented.
Appellate Cases can be further appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. if either party disagrees with the decision in the trial court, they can appeal, asking a higher court to review the decision.The outcome of appeals cases have the potential to affect large numbers of people, because these decisions are binding on district courts within the circuit. The two sides present evidence and witnesses, and either a judge or a jury makes a decision based on the evidence presented. No new evidence is presented, the judge(s) simply review the materials from the original trial and determine whether the lower court made the correct legal decision.
Last part is the most important Per http://www.civilrights.org/judiciary/courts/difference-trial-appellate-courts.html
Still not seeing it.
K the best i can do is:
So you know how in movies there is normally the scene at the end of the court case where the losing party says “we are going to win on appeal”
K so they lost their case in trial court, so they are appealing the decision to a higher court (appellate court). There the evidence/case is reviewed by a higher court to determine if the resolution handed down by the lower court was proper; given the circumstances.
Same thing happens with the Supreme Court. If they find any errors in the process, or find anything sufficient or insufficient the lower court's ruling is either overturned or affirmed, “on appeals."
Quote:
whatsgrimace said:
Quote:
elax420 said:
Quote:
whatsgrimace said: Which is why having a case in court is confusing and raping.
Which is why good Lawyers are some of the most powerful people in the country.
You think thats bad you should see Torts. Torts is mad fucked.
My lawyer made me claim guilty of fleeing the police charge that never fucking happened.
Public Defender? Small and, or overworked court system?
Shit sucks man. Corruption is always present, like in any other field, and sometimes the DA and Public Defender work together for a “you scratch my back, I scratch yours” situation. DA gets an easy conviction, Public Defender gets a favor he can call in.
Torts is the french word for Injury. Its a Civil Procedure, which has an entirely different set of rules then a Criminal Procedure does. Most of being a lawyer is procedural and knowing both written and unwritten rules that are 100’s of years old.
Half of the shit they do in the Supreme Court isn’t written down and is just done out of tradition and precedence.
Fun fact: All Justices, aside from I think Scalia (it may be Alito, I mix up my conservative douches), have up to 2 clerks that work together with the other clerks to comb through thousands of cases trying to heard by the court and highlight the ones they think are pertinent for review. Then their specific justices make the ultimate decision on which cases will be heard or not.
Scalia is a fucking douche though so his 2 clerks have to read through every single case brought to the court on their own. That is A LOT of work......
|
|