You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #295: Thanks for the case cite. I don't think the SCOTUS did that in the Union Pacific case. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
295. Thanks for the case cite. I don't think the SCOTUS did that in the Union Pacific case.
I confess my eyesight and my impatience did not permit to scour the entire, very boring opinion. However, I saw nothing about that in the SCOTUS opinion, other than to say that the point had been raised in the briefs and the lower courts. However, the syllabus or summary at the beginning--which is NOT part of the offical opinion, says that the Court decided it. I hope Justice Sotomayor or some SCOTUS law clerk notices that soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC