Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2013 10:45:21 GMT -5
They had the power to make the decision today and didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by cassie on Mar 26, 2013 10:46:13 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2013 10:48:13 GMT -5
They had the power to make the decision today and didn't. That's just not how the Supreme Court works. CNN says they hear another case on the Defense of Marriage Act tomorrow. Then they research the constitutional issues and debate with one another and then write their opinions. They may or may not consolidate the two cases, they may or may not rule narrowly or broadly. In any case, as sugaree noted, a ruling is not expected until June. |
|
Albiku
Member
@Albiku
Posts: 3,021
Location:
|
Post by Albiku on Mar 26, 2013 10:53:25 GMT -5
They had the power to make the decision today and didn't. I'm sure it will happen. Big changes don't come quickly! I'm sure we'll celebrate soon, you'll see!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by HoppersSkippersMiners on Mar 26, 2013 10:54:05 GMT -5
They had the power to make the decision today and didn't. [shrug] Don't be mad, bb. IMO it would be highly irresponsible for the highest court in the land to make an instant judgement after arguments, no matter how obvious the decision seems to be. It is their *JOB* to dot every "i" and cross every "t" in formulating their decision so that it can stand up to historical scrutiny. If their final decision is to come out in June (as per junie's post) so be it. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2013 11:04:04 GMT -5
They had the power to make the decision today and didn't. when has the Supreme Court ever made a decision the same day that they heard arguments in a case? |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2013 11:04:34 GMT -5
Just for example, in Brown v. Board of Education (for our international Glamberts, the Supreme Court decision that struck down racial segregation in the public schools), the court heard the case twice -- first in the spring of 1953, then again in the fall of 1953 because they asked the attorneys back to present more information. The actual ruling did not come down until May 1954.
And, the ruling followed years of previous cases -- such as the 1950 decision that set aside racial segregation at public colleges and universities.
ETA: As hoppers said, one of the reasons it took so long is that the Supreme Court wanted to make sure the decision was perfect. Most cases have dissenting votes but in the case of Brown they worked very hard until they could agree on what to say and make it unanimous.
|
|
|
|
Post by smokeyvera on Mar 26, 2013 11:09:07 GMT -5
Jesslala, I just read your post today concerning your brothers. I'm so sorry for your loss. Two brothers in such a short time just has to so overwhelming and unbelievable. May your heart heal and your road to grief recovery be smooth. I just can't begin to imagine your grief. Big hugs to you.
|
|
JazzRocks
Member
The Crazy Train is Ready to Roll!
Posts: 4,280
Location:
|
Post by JazzRocks on Mar 26, 2013 11:10:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by HoppersSkippersMiners on Mar 26, 2013 11:10:49 GMT -5
NO WAY. On so many levels.. First, Kurt's gravel voice made the Nirvana sound what it was. IMO, trying to reproduce even a fraction of that raw gravel would shred Adam's voice, but Nirvana isn't Nirvana without the gravel. Second, Nirvana was all about the angst. Pretty much nuth'n but angst. That's rather bleak for our mostly sunny Adam. Angst is a part of life, but a diet of angst alone is hard on the personality (sure didn't help Cobain) [irony] |
|
