"The Most Important Political Litigation of the Last 50 Years"

#1
n_huffhines

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
84,607
Likes
50,122
#1
Based on anti-trust, it seems like an open and shut case, but the federal judge is just sitting on it.

The Libertarian and Green parties filed suit last September with U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., seeking to get the 15 percent requirement waived on antitrust grounds, since the two existing market entrants have created an entity which has created rules designed specifically to blunt competition.

"there isn't much you can do with a federal judge who decides that she's going to keep it on her desk for a while. You know, you can't shake her by the shoulders and say 'Hurry up!'"
Click to expand...

The Gary Johnson Debate Lawsuit Has Almost Run out of Time - Hit & Run : Reason.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3
#3
It was filed last September and a motion to dismiss from April/May is still pending. It was doomed from the beginning if they expected a trial in less than a year without a preliminary injunction (which they apparently did not seek). Still worth pursuing for the next election.
 
#5
#5
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
It's like asking for a seat at a corrupt poker game. Bake the cake.
Click to expand...

I do understand somewhat limiting the number of people on the stage at a debate. If there aren't limits you'd have every Tom, Dick and Harriet on stage and end up with the mass chaos like we saw with the first GOP debates this past year.

However, I do think the threshold could be lowered to maybe 10% with the candidate having to appear on the ballot in all 50 States. I believe the wheat could be sorted from the chaff that way and still make it fair.
 
#6
#6
Grand Vol said:
I do understand somewhat limiting the number of people on the stage at a debate. If there aren't limits you'd have every Tom, Dick and Harriet on stage and end up with the mass chaos like we saw with the first GOP debates this past year.

However, I do think the threshold could be lowered to maybe 10% with the candidate having to appear on the ballot in all 50 States. I believe the wheat could be sorted from the chaff that way and still make it fair.
Click to expand...

You make a good point, but they've found a loophole in the law and they need to either grant Johnson a seat at the table or change the law.
 
#7
#7
Grand Vol said:
I do understand somewhat limiting the number of people on the stage at a debate. If there aren't limits you'd have every Tom, Dick and Harriet on stage and end up with the mass chaos like we saw with the first GOP debates this past year.

However, I do think the threshold could be lowered to maybe 10% with the candidate having to appear on the ballot in all 50 States. I believe the wheat could be sorted from the chaff that way and still make it fair.
Click to expand...

Bears repeating. However, freezing litigation should not be within a judges power. If one judge can't accomodate a case on their docket, they should, by law, remove themselves and the case is transferred to a location where it can be heard.
 
#8
#8
Grand Vol said:
I do understand somewhat limiting the number of people on the stage at a debate. If there aren't limits you'd have every Tom, Dick and Harriet on stage and end up with the mass chaos like we saw with the first GOP debates this past year.

However, I do think the threshold could be lowered to maybe 10% with the candidate having to appear on the ballot in all 50 States. I believe the wheat could be sorted from the chaff that way and still make it fair.
Click to expand...

The only way to make it "fair" is to burn the field in which the wheat is grown. (L)ibertarians are a joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#9
#9
Orangedogsrule said:
Bears repeating. However, freezing litigation should not be within a judges power. If one judge can't accomodate a case on their docket, they should, by law, remove themselves and the case is transferred to a location where it can be heard.
Click to expand...

Nothing in that article indicates any "freezing" by the judge.
 
#10
#10
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
The only way to make it "fair" is to burn the field in which the wheat is grown. (L)ibertarians are a joke.
Click to expand...

3f4.gif
 
#16
#16
Velo Vol said:
What law?
Click to expand...

Anti-trust law.

If limiting competition in the market place is bad, isn't it worse in the political arena?

Imagine a cartel that excludes Mom & Pop shops from advertising on Google unless they have 15% of the market.
 
#17
#17
n_huffhines said:
Anti-trust law.

If limiting competition in the market place is bad, isn't it worse in the political arena?

Imagine a cartel that excludes Mom & Pop shops from advertising on Google unless they have 15% of the market.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity and since you generally take strict free market views on other topics, are you for or against antitrust laws that attempt to prevent monopolization by private companies?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#18
#18
vols4sure said:
Out of curiosity and since you generally take strict free market views on other topics, are you for or against antitrust laws that attempt to prevent monopolization by private companies?
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, I'm against anti-trust law, but if they are going to exist they might as well be used for good.
 
#19
#19
vols4sure said:
Nothing in that article indicates any "freezing" by the judge.
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension got you down!? Here, take two sentences and call me in the morning.

~From the link~
----------
Gray, a retired judge who was the Libertarian Party's vice presidential nominee in 2012, laments that "there isn't much you can do with a federal judge who decides that she's going to keep it on her desk for a while. You know, you can't shake her by the shoulders and say 'Hurry up!'"
----------------------------
 
#20
#20
Orangedogsrule said:
Reading comprehension got you down!? Here, take two sentences and call me in the morning.

~From the link~
----------
Gray, a retired judge who was the Libertarian Party's vice presidential nominee in 2012, laments that "there isn't much you can do with a federal judge who decides that she's going to keep it on her desk for a while. You know, you can't shake her by the shoulders and say 'Hurry up!'"
----------------------------
Click to expand...

Believe me, there is zero in the actual timeline that indicates the judge dragging her feet. Virtually no cases in the federal court system make it to trial within a year.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top