Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:54 pm
Reissued
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 20059 Gender: Male
broken iris wrote:
So after some further reading on this, I am not sure the article I posted got it's facts right. The case seems to be revolving around 'gray market' goods, not foreign made goods that are legally imported and sold in the US (like the iPhone). Do we still have any lawyers on the board or have they all abandoned the PJ-verse?
I was a little confused about that. It seems more sensible that they would target not foreign produced goods, but goods that saw their first sale in foreign countries (although even that distinction would present some of the problems mentioned in the article).
Still, I don't really like the ruling. Arbitrage is key to making markets work efficiently. I don't think we should limit the practices that the student engaged in, though if tariffs already apply, then I can see the rationale for applying them (since they'd be applied on any other goods coming in from Thailand).
_________________ stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:46 pm
Administrator
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
The first sale doctrine was actually considered two years ago in Costco v. Omega, but the Court split 4-4 with Kagan recused. Since she's on board this time, it should settle a question that's been lingering too long.
I think the most interesting patent/copyright case before the Court, however, will be Bowman v. Monsanto. This one ought to get all my anti-GMO friends/family riled up again.
In other news, the Court still hasn't decided one way or the other on the Prop 8 and DOMA cases.
I think the most interesting patent/copyright case before the Court, however, will be Bowman v. Monsanto. This one ought to get all my anti-GMO friends/family riled up again.
_________________ "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -- John Steinbeck
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:50 am
Administrator
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
I'm giving this thread a preemptive bump to give a heads up that over the next week or so, the Court could decide whether or not to grant cert on the Prop 8 and DOMA cases that have trickled their way up from the lower courts. My guess is that they deny the Prop 8 case but grant at least one of the DOMA cases that are out there.
I'm giving this thread a preemptive bump to give a heads up that over the next week or so, the Court could decide whether or not to grant cert on the Prop 8 and DOMA cases that have trickled their way up from the lower courts. My guess is that they deny the Prop 8 case but grant at least one of the DOMA cases that are out there.
Sorry for my ignorance on this, but why is this obvious bigotry (DOMA) even under debate? It seems like this is not a federal issue. Interstate commerce clause?
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:04 pm
Administrator
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
broken iris wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
I'm giving this thread a preemptive bump to give a heads up that over the next week or so, the Court could decide whether or not to grant cert on the Prop 8 and DOMA cases that have trickled their way up from the lower courts. My guess is that they deny the Prop 8 case but grant at least one of the DOMA cases that are out there.
Sorry for my ignorance on this, but why is this obvious bigotry (DOMA) even under debate? It seems like this is not a federal issue. Interstate commerce clause?
Uh...DOMA was a federal law. Maybe I don't get what you're getting at. Though, I've read good arguments that you might get someone like Thomas to concur in the judgment in striking down DOMA by going on a federalism basis as opposed to due process/equal protection.
I'm giving this thread a preemptive bump to give a heads up that over the next week or so, the Court could decide whether or not to grant cert on the Prop 8 and DOMA cases that have trickled their way up from the lower courts. My guess is that they deny the Prop 8 case but grant at least one of the DOMA cases that are out there.
Sorry for my ignorance on this, but why is this obvious bigotry (DOMA) even under debate? It seems like this is not a federal issue. Interstate commerce clause?
Uh...DOMA was a federal law. Maybe I don't get what you're getting at. Though, I've read good arguments that you might get someone like Thomas to concur in the judgment in striking down DOMA by going on a federalism basis as opposed to due process/equal protection.
Sorry, iphone post. I was asking under what law does the congress have authority to legislate section 3 of the DOMA?
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:45 pm
Administrator
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
broken iris wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
broken iris wrote:
Green Habit wrote:
I'm giving this thread a preemptive bump to give a heads up that over the next week or so, the Court could decide whether or not to grant cert on the Prop 8 and DOMA cases that have trickled their way up from the lower courts. My guess is that they deny the Prop 8 case but grant at least one of the DOMA cases that are out there.
Sorry for my ignorance on this, but why is this obvious bigotry (DOMA) even under debate? It seems like this is not a federal issue. Interstate commerce clause?
Uh...DOMA was a federal law. Maybe I don't get what you're getting at. Though, I've read good arguments that you might get someone like Thomas to concur in the judgment in striking down DOMA by going on a federalism basis as opposed to due process/equal protection.
Sorry, iphone post. I was asking under what law does the congress have authority to legislate section 3 of the DOMA?
Well, that question broadens into the whole enumerated/implied powers debate of the Constitution that goes farther than DOMA. Still, I think that no matter which path you take, DOMA is rightfully doomed. That's why I said that you could have a lineup in which 5-7 justices opine for the Court the more conventional view that a specific clause in the Constitutional strikes down the law, while Thomas instead says it should be struck down because Congress lacks the authority to pass laws regulating marriage, a matter he deems to be the business of state governments.
It'd be quite delicious if Scalia is on the losing end of an 8-1 vote on this issue.
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:04 pm
too drunk to moderate properly
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
What's an "order" mean?
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
_________________ "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -- John Steinbeck
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:37 pm
Got Some
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 7:04 pm Posts: 1875 Location: Atlanta, SE of Disorder Gender: Male
There's a conservative message board I lurk around a few times week; one that has a heavy evangelical crowd. Social topics like gay marriage, abortion and evolution is red meat to them. Got a chuckle out of this one:
"'I was once friends with [a pastor] told me the warning of Sodom and Gamorrah was really about hospitality, the cities were destroyed because they did not invite each other into their homes. I've often wondered if that is why a lot of gay couples are always having dinner parties and social gatherings, well decorated homes, etc."
I don't mean post this in a belittling, look at them way but I'm always surprised by people who truly have mindsets like this
_________________ From under my lone palm i can look out on the day
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 4:29 am
too drunk to moderate properly
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
I wish i sensed more irony there.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
_________________ "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -- John Steinbeck
There's a conservative message board I lurk around a few times week; one that has a heavy evangelical crowd. Social topics like gay marriage, abortion and evolution is red meat to them. Got a chuckle out of this one:
"'I was once friends with [a pastor] told me the warning of Sodom and Gamorrah was really about hospitality, the cities were destroyed because they did not invite each other into their homes. I've often wondered if that is why a lot of gay couples are always having dinner parties and social gatherings, well decorated homes, etc."
I don't mean post this in a belittling, look at them way but I'm always surprised by people who truly have mindsets like this
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 8:22 pm
Administrator
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:53 pm Posts: 20537 Location: The City Of Trees
SCOTUSblog wrote:
We have the orders now. Prop. 8 is grantred. So is Windsor. Those are the only two marriage cases granted.
Prop. 8 is granted on the petition question -- whether 14th Am. bars Calif. from defining marriage in traditional way. Plus an added question: Whether the backers of Prop.. 8 have standing in the case under Art. III.
n Windsor, the government petition (12-307) is the one granted. In addition to the petition question -- whether Sec. 3 of DOMA violates equal protection under 5th Amendment, there are two other questions: does the fact that government agreed with the 2d CA decision deprive the Court of jurisdiction to hear and decide the case, and whether BLAG (House GOP leaders) has Art. III standing in this case.
The added questions make it sound real likely that SCOTUS is looking for an excuse to punt this issue...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum