Jump to content

Didba

Gold Donor
  • Posts

    5,740
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Didba last won the day on September 24 2022

Didba had the most liked content!

About Didba

Profile Information

  • Interests
    Football, Steely Dan, Law School Grad, Civil Litigation, Guitar, the Bar? Put a fork in it.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,856 profile views

Didba's Achievements

Founding Father

Founding Father (14/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • Reacting Well
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges

5.3k

Reputation

  1. It’s not just our LBers. That’s a positional mismatch for everyone.
  2. Respectfully disagree with that logic. Using new technology in a jury trial, your logic stands for sure but in a football game?
  3. So tired of this team showing up flat. That’s coaching.
  4. Hey, I found a great write-up that explains the whole process that occurred in Colorado from the district level to the Supreme Court: https://www.reddit.com/r/supremecourt/s/1Q0mPkdORa I implore everyone to read it objectively because that forum is extremely tightly moderated and any use of unsubstantiated argument/rhetoric will be removed so it really does have people just objectively explaining what’s going on with these complex topics. I actually consider the forum to be moderate right comparatively to other legal forums on Reddit.
  5. That’s fair, I took your bored comment differently but I see what you meant now. Apologies.
  6. I wasn’t going to hop in on this because I’m just here to talk about the actual court proceedings but the above made me laugh so I had to chime in while talking to a man about a horse. however, don’t be dishonest about being bored. You love this shiz, you love arguing over this stuff with these guys. All of you do on both sides. You are entertained and loving every minute of this adversarial conversation. You wouldn’t be in these threads all the time sparring if you were bored by all of this. I know because I used to be the same way, it doesn’t do anything for me anymore as such I’m rarely in here unless something substantive has happened regarding court proceedings/developments in the law.
  7. It’s not a red/blue thing it’s just appellate courts following the standards of review required for appellate courts. but to answer your question; yes, if a lower court ruled the same exact stuff but against Biden the appellate court reviewing it would be bound by those findings of fact absent evidence of clear error/abuse of discretion by the lower court. my other posts explain it better so you may want to read them if you want a better understanding of standards of review for appellate courts. If you haven’t yet of course.
  8. Also, the standards of review for matters of law vs fact are pretty much the same in every state so what I am talking about isn’t some unique blue state law/circumstance. I would expect the same outcome from the same facts/decisions in any state.
  9. Because appellate courts don’t review matters of fact, they review matters of law. They only reverse on factual matters when there is evidence of clear error/abuse of discretion by the original court. The Colorado SC had to give deference to the district court’s findings of fact I explained it in my original post in this thread in more detail if you want to go back and read it. You replied to it briefly. also, just because a court knew it is likely to be overturned doesn’t mean they can deviate from what they are required to do under the applicable standard of review. The court was bound by the lower court’s factual findings.
×
×
  • Create New...