Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Show your support for what this community means to you:


Choose a Donation Amount
Username (required for credit)



Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. If you dare criticize Jimmy Lake, you won't last long.

"Illegal Immigrants and Crime – Assessing the Evidence"

13»

Comments

  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Posts: 4,132
    Sixth Anniversary 2500 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes


    Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.

    The Trial Court, in other words. BFD.

    With the 9th Circuit C of Apps being the most frequently reversed of all U.S. circuit courts, it's legal malpractice to rely on any decision from a California trial court withstanding the scrutiny of actual judges whom understand the law.

    California courts are the laughing stock of modern jurisprudence.

    Herein fail not at your peril.
    California trial court? Jfc, once again, you are an imbecile. The “US” in US district court should have been your first clue that this is not a California court. This was a federal court. I look forward to hearing your keen legal insights turd. Your innacuracy and general buffoonery is always amusing.
    Thanks for enlightening us to the fact that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is, and I'll quote you directly, "not a California Court."

    Not sure how you got there, but not the least bit surprised.

    Stay in T-ball, tadpole. You ain't ready for coach-pitch yet.
    So you’re saying the US federal district court jurisdiction covers Northern California? Brilliant observation. A Q for you TurdbufferFS— how did the court get there and who put them in place? Did you also know that in addition to being the most overturned in absolute numbers, the ninth circuit is also the most affirmed? How can that be TurdbufferFS? This is fun!
    TurdBomber
  • Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Posts: 12,962
    Standard Supporter 10000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Up Votes

    What about the fact that at least half of them are committing identity fraud

    Didn’t you steal your sister’s absentee ballot?
    You bet your fucking ass! She is on record as a trump supporter
    RaceBannonLebamDawg
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Posts: 6,998
    Standard Supporter 5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes


    Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.

    The Trial Court, in other words. BFD.

    With the 9th Circuit C of Apps being the most frequently reversed of all U.S. circuit courts, it's legal malpractice to rely on any decision from a California trial court withstanding the scrutiny of actual judges whom understand the law.

    California courts are the laughing stock of modern jurisprudence.

    Herein fail not at your peril.
    California trial court? Jfc, once again, you are an imbecile. The “US” in US district court should have been your first clue that this is not a California court. This was a federal court. I look forward to hearing your keen legal insights turd. Your innacuracy and general buffoonery is always amusing.
    Thanks for enlightening us to the fact that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is, and I'll quote you directly, "not a California Court."

    Not sure how you got there, but not the least bit surprised.

    Stay in T-ball, tadpole. You ain't ready for coach-pitch yet.
    So you’re saying the US federal district court jurisdiction covers Northern California? Brilliant observation. A Q for you TurdbufferFS— how did the court get there and who put them in place? Did you also know that in addition to being the most overturned in absolute numbers, the ninth circuit is also the most affirmed? How can that be TurdbufferFS? This is fun!
    But surprising news to you. HTH
  • USMChawkUSMChawk Posts: 663
    Standard Supporter 250 Answers 500 Up Votes 500 Awesomes
    edited March 14


    Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.

    The Trial Court, in other words. BFD.

    With the 9th Circuit C of Apps being the most frequently reversed of all U.S. circuit courts, it's legal malpractice to rely on any decision from a California trial court withstanding the scrutiny of actual judges whom understand the law.

    California courts are the laughing stock of modern jurisprudence.

    Herein fail not at your peril.
    California trial court? Jfc, once again, you are an imbecile. The “US” in US district court should have been your first clue that this is not a California court. This was a federal court. I look forward to hearing your keen legal insights turd. Your innacuracy and general buffoonery is always amusing.
    Thanks for enlightening us to the fact that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is, and I'll quote you directly, "not a California Court."

    Not sure how you got there, but not the least bit surprised.

    Stay in T-ball, tadpole. You ain't ready for coach-pitch yet.
    So you’re saying the US federal district court jurisdiction covers Northern California? Brilliant observation. A Q for you TurdbufferFS— how did the court get there and who put them in place? Did you also know that in addition to being the most overturned in absolute numbers, the ninth circuit is also the most affirmed? How can that be TurdbufferFS? This is fun!
    Link?

    I suspect you’re conflating volume of confirmed cases with percentage of confirmed cases. If the 9th circuit rules on 100,000 cases/year, but only has a 20% confirmation rate, then they have 20,000 confirmed cases a year. If the 5th circuit rules on 30,000 cases/year, but has a 50% confirmed rate, then they would have 15,000 confirmed cases a year. You’re saying that 20,000 > 15,000, and proves the effectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’m saying 20% < 50% and proves the ineffectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’ll take quality over quantity.

    Note, I made up all of the above numbers except the 20% confirmation rate (or an 80% overturn rate); that’s abysmal.
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Posts: 4,132
    Sixth Anniversary 2500 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    USMChawk said:


    Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.

    The Trial Court, in other words. BFD.

    With the 9th Circuit C of Apps being the most frequently reversed of all U.S. circuit courts, it's legal malpractice to rely on any decision from a California trial court withstanding the scrutiny of actual judges whom understand the law.

    California courts are the laughing stock of modern jurisprudence.

    Herein fail not at your peril.
    California trial court? Jfc, once again, you are an imbecile. The “US” in US district court should have been your first clue that this is not a California court. This was a federal court. I look forward to hearing your keen legal insights turd. Your innacuracy and general buffoonery is always amusing.
    Thanks for enlightening us to the fact that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is, and I'll quote you directly, "not a California Court."

    Not sure how you got there, but not the least bit surprised.

    Stay in T-ball, tadpole. You ain't ready for coach-pitch yet.
    So you’re saying the US federal district court jurisdiction covers Northern California? Brilliant observation. A Q for you TurdbufferFS— how did the court get there and who put them in place? Did you also know that in addition to being the most overturned in absolute numbers, the ninth circuit is also the most affirmed? How can that be TurdbufferFS? This is fun!
    Link?

    I suspect you’re conflating volume of confirmed cases with percentage of confirmed cases. If the 9th circuit rules on 100,000 cases/year, but only has a 20% confirmation rate, then they have 20,000 confirmed cases a year. If the 5th circuit rules on 30,000 cases/year, but has a 50% confirmed rate, then they would have 15,000 confirmed cases a year. You’re saying that 20,000 > 15,000, and proves the effectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’m saying 20% < 50% and proves the ineffectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’ll take quality over quantity.

    Note, I made up all of the above numbers except the 20% confirmation rate (or an 80% overturn rate); that’s abysmal.
    Typing it in on my phone. I know it’s not live but you can follow the trail.

    Washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/21/does-the-ninth-circuit/overturn-80-percent-or-0-1-percent-of-it’s-cases

    The ninth circuit processes by far the largest volume of appeals, given the size of its jurisdiction. Only a small fraction of appealed decisions are accepted by the Supreme Court for review. Even then, its reversal rate is neither the highest nor an outlier year to year.
    TurdBomber
  • SledogSledog Posts: 9,344
    5000 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes 500 Up Votes

    USMChawk said:


    Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.

    The Trial Court, in other words. BFD.

    With the 9th Circuit C of Apps being the most frequently reversed of all U.S. circuit courts, it's legal malpractice to rely on any decision from a California trial court withstanding the scrutiny of actual judges whom understand the law.

    California courts are the laughing stock of modern jurisprudence.

    Herein fail not at your peril.
    California trial court? Jfc, once again, you are an imbecile. The “US” in US district court should have been your first clue that this is not a California court. This was a federal court. I look forward to hearing your keen legal insights turd. Your innacuracy and general buffoonery is always amusing.
    Thanks for enlightening us to the fact that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is, and I'll quote you directly, "not a California Court."

    Not sure how you got there, but not the least bit surprised.

    Stay in T-ball, tadpole. You ain't ready for coach-pitch yet.
    So you’re saying the US federal district court jurisdiction covers Northern California? Brilliant observation. A Q for you TurdbufferFS— how did the court get there and who put them in place? Did you also know that in addition to being the most overturned in absolute numbers, the ninth circuit is also the most affirmed? How can that be TurdbufferFS? This is fun!
    Link?

    I suspect you’re conflating volume of confirmed cases with percentage of confirmed cases. If the 9th circuit rules on 100,000 cases/year, but only has a 20% confirmation rate, then they have 20,000 confirmed cases a year. If the 5th circuit rules on 30,000 cases/year, but has a 50% confirmed rate, then they would have 15,000 confirmed cases a year. You’re saying that 20,000 > 15,000, and proves the effectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’m saying 20% < 50% and proves the ineffectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’ll take quality over quantity.

    Note, I made up all of the above numbers except the 20% confirmation rate (or an 80% overturn rate); that’s abysmal.
    Typing it in on my phone. I know it’s not live but you can follow the trail.

    Washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/21/does-the-ninth-circuit/overturn-80-percent-or-0-1-percent-of-it’s-cases

    The ninth circuit processes by far the largest volume of appeals, given the size of its jurisdiction. Only a small fraction of appealed decisions are accepted by the Supreme Court for review. Even then, its reversal rate is neither the highest nor an outlier year to year.
    That's why it's referred to as the 9th Circus by most Kalifornians.
    CirrhosisDawg
  • CirrhosisDawgCirrhosisDawg Posts: 4,132
    Sixth Anniversary 2500 Comments 250 Answers 500 Awesomes
    Sledog said:

    USMChawk said:


    Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.

    The Trial Court, in other words. BFD.

    With the 9th Circuit C of Apps being the most frequently reversed of all U.S. circuit courts, it's legal malpractice to rely on any decision from a California trial court withstanding the scrutiny of actual judges whom understand the law.

    California courts are the laughing stock of modern jurisprudence.

    Herein fail not at your peril.
    California trial court? Jfc, once again, you are an imbecile. The “US” in US district court should have been your first clue that this is not a California court. This was a federal court. I look forward to hearing your keen legal insights turd. Your innacuracy and general buffoonery is always amusing.
    Thanks for enlightening us to the fact that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is, and I'll quote you directly, "not a California Court."

    Not sure how you got there, but not the least bit surprised.

    Stay in T-ball, tadpole. You ain't ready for coach-pitch yet.
    So you’re saying the US federal district court jurisdiction covers Northern California? Brilliant observation. A Q for you TurdbufferFS— how did the court get there and who put them in place? Did you also know that in addition to being the most overturned in absolute numbers, the ninth circuit is also the most affirmed? How can that be TurdbufferFS? This is fun!
    Link?

    I suspect you’re conflating volume of confirmed cases with percentage of confirmed cases. If the 9th circuit rules on 100,000 cases/year, but only has a 20% confirmation rate, then they have 20,000 confirmed cases a year. If the 5th circuit rules on 30,000 cases/year, but has a 50% confirmed rate, then they would have 15,000 confirmed cases a year. You’re saying that 20,000 > 15,000, and proves the effectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’m saying 20% < 50% and proves the ineffectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’ll take quality over quantity.

    Note, I made up all of the above numbers except the 20% confirmation rate (or an 80% overturn rate); that’s abysmal.
    Typing it in on my phone. I know it’s not live but you can follow the trail.

    Washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/21/does-the-ninth-circuit/overturn-80-percent-or-0-1-percent-of-it’s-cases

    The ninth circuit processes by far the largest volume of appeals, given the size of its jurisdiction. Only a small fraction of appealed decisions are accepted by the Supreme Court for review. Even then, its reversal rate is neither the highest nor an outlier year to year.
    That's why it's referred to as the 9th Circus by most Kalifornians.
    Wut?
    TurdBomber
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Posts: 14,964
    Swaye's Wigwam 10000 Comments 250 Answers Sixth Anniversary

    USMChawk said:


    Once again, just like with sanctuary laws, a US district court slapped down trump on the census question finding it unconstitutional. Unlike with sanctuary laws, however, trump plans on appealing so there will be more to come. For the time being, however, there will not be a citizenship question in the census.

    The Trial Court, in other words. BFD.

    With the 9th Circuit C of Apps being the most frequently reversed of all U.S. circuit courts, it's legal malpractice to rely on any decision from a California trial court withstanding the scrutiny of actual judges whom understand the law.

    California courts are the laughing stock of modern jurisprudence.

    Herein fail not at your peril.
    California trial court? Jfc, once again, you are an imbecile. The “US” in US district court should have been your first clue that this is not a California court. This was a federal court. I look forward to hearing your keen legal insights turd. Your innacuracy and general buffoonery is always amusing.
    Thanks for enlightening us to the fact that the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California is, and I'll quote you directly, "not a California Court."

    Not sure how you got there, but not the least bit surprised.

    Stay in T-ball, tadpole. You ain't ready for coach-pitch yet.
    So you’re saying the US federal district court jurisdiction covers Northern California? Brilliant observation. A Q for you TurdbufferFS— how did the court get there and who put them in place? Did you also know that in addition to being the most overturned in absolute numbers, the ninth circuit is also the most affirmed? How can that be TurdbufferFS? This is fun!
    Link?

    I suspect you’re conflating volume of confirmed cases with percentage of confirmed cases. If the 9th circuit rules on 100,000 cases/year, but only has a 20% confirmation rate, then they have 20,000 confirmed cases a year. If the 5th circuit rules on 30,000 cases/year, but has a 50% confirmed rate, then they would have 15,000 confirmed cases a year. You’re saying that 20,000 > 15,000, and proves the effectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’m saying 20% < 50% and proves the ineffectiveness of the 9th circuit. I’ll take quality over quantity.

    Note, I made up all of the above numbers except the 20% confirmation rate (or an 80% overturn rate); that’s abysmal.
    Typing it in on my phone. I know it’s not live but you can follow the trail.

    Washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/03/21/does-the-ninth-circuit/overturn-80-percent-or-0-1-percent-of-it’s-cases

    The ninth circuit processes by far the largest volume of appeals, given the size of its jurisdiction. Only a small fraction of appealed decisions are accepted by the Supreme Court for review. Even then, its reversal rate is neither the highest nor an outlier year to year.
    I5? 90Mph? Coke off a hookers ass?
    CirrhosisDawg
  • LebamDawgLebamDawg Posts: 1,740
    Butler Cabin Supporter 250 Answers 1000 Comments 500 Up Votes
    in a 10 year span 99-08, 175 cases from the 9th were visited by the Supremes - they in turn reversed/vacated 140 of said cases for that 80% figure. Federal circuit is the only one higher at 83%



    the 9th sees many more cases than the Supremes review.
Sign In or Register to comment.