\
  The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
BackRefresh Options Favorite

RESOLVED: JUDGES DECIDE CASES ON THE BASIS OF FAIRNESS, NOT LAW

Any credible disagreement with this proposition?
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
Did they not teach you about equity vs law? In old England t...
Sick pontificating sanctuary gaping
  02/09/12
See, e.g., JEFFREY A. SEGAL & HAROLD J. SPAETH, THE SUPR...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
You think Segal and Spaeth haven't been criticized many time...
Heady very tactful generalized bond gas station
  02/10/12
I still think they're right, as flawed as their study might ...
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/10/12
http://www.hairfinder.com/celebrityhairstyles2/sarah-shahi2....
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  07/23/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  10/06/15
Gross simplification of British law.
180 preventive strike
  03/22/12
I tend to agree with slim. However, there are the rare occur...
Chartreuse cruel-hearted native police squad
  02/10/12
he is absolutely correct if you replace "fair" wit...
Light persian
  02/10/12
TYFT, brother. I agree whole-heartedly. Care to elaborate?
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/10/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  12/21/12
false (see dismissals on basis of statute of limitations pro...
wonderful sable windowlicker
  02/09/12
cr
twinkling glittery hall
  02/09/12
provide please several citations to such dismissals along wi...
razzmatazz office
  02/09/12
...
mind-boggling garrison mother
  02/09/12
Duh! Those obvious cases are where the judge just applies th...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
procedural defects aren't always clear-cut
cerebral nudist stag film volcanic crater
  02/09/12
So do judges decide the bar on successive motions of habeas ...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
don't know, don't care
cerebral nudist stag film volcanic crater
  02/09/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  09/16/15
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  03/21/12
I find 'fairness' a weird name for what you're getting at
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
What's a better word? I am trying to say that a judge decide...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
you are 100% correct
Light persian
  02/10/12
whats a better word then?
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/17/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  03/22/12
most procedural errors are corrected via motion for leave to...
multi-colored mood
  02/09/12
Very cogent, brother. Expand a little please.
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
no
multi-colored mood
  02/09/12
lol
Histrionic Magical Halford Trust Fund
  12/21/12
...
Zombie-like lodge
  04/07/17
(says something unintelligent about equitable tolling)
Shivering digit ratio really tough guy
  02/09/12
Even tolling is applied according to fairly rigid doctrines....
wonderful sable windowlicker
  02/09/12
How about at the COA and SCOTUS level?
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
what an idiot
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Reynolds
Navy range
  02/09/12
What about Maher Arar, brother?
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
uh, by definition, thats what equity courts are supposed to ...
cracking legend principal's office
  02/09/12
even for courts of chancery, they decide on the basis of fai...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
if chancery is the same as equity, then yes, that is the leg...
cracking legend principal's office
  02/09/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
well duh, they're courts of chancery
Shivering digit ratio really tough guy
  02/09/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  09/23/12
Twist: the law is fair
salmon mad cow disease site
  02/09/12
if law was fair, this guy would have gotten monetary relief....
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
But Slim, what argument that proceeding w his litigation sev...
salmon mad cow disease site
  02/09/12
The invocation of the State Secret privilege in this case wa...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
That statement standing alone seems a little conclusory. Des...
salmon mad cow disease site
  02/09/12
read david cole's brief man. He litigated the case on appeal...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  09/30/15
to be fair, no (see bush v. gore)
Ebony whorehouse affirmative action
  02/09/12
ya that was decided on the basis of fairness
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
Sarcasm?
salmon mad cow disease site
  02/09/12
the conservative bloc thought it was fair to give the electi...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
But you didn't think it was. amirite
salmon mad cow disease site
  02/09/12
See, e.g., JEFFREY A. SEGAL & HAROLD J. SPAETH, THE SUPR...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  10/20/15
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  03/13/12
lol, just lol
Ebony whorehouse affirmative action
  02/09/12
Korematsu v. US
french rehab
  02/09/12
fairness again
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
Korematsu would disagree with you.
french rehab
  02/09/12
then what did they decide the case on ? not on the law...on ...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
exigency =/= fairness.
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
titocr
french rehab
  02/09/12
define fairness, brother. is fairness some intangible, publi...
french rehab
  02/09/12
See, e.g., JEFFREY A. SEGAL & HAROLD J. SPAETH, THE SUPR...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
attitudes/values =/= fairness
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
You've never noticed that your COA judge decides on the basi...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
attitudes are not fairness, brother. also, my judge (who I'm...
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
I know the law might suggest an outcome, but ultimately, in ...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
why the fuck does that matter, a hard case by definition is ...
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
Hard cases are where the stakes tend to be extremely high on...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
but you see, that's a HARD CASE about which the constitution...
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
There you go, brother. You just recognized my point. Have yo...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
but strong indeterminacy is bullshit, 99% of law is settled
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
I just fucking said that. Christ. Thoughts on Critical L...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
you so did not just fucking say that
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/09/12
Oh apologies, brother. I meant I was NOT advocating Crit. Th...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/09/12
...
Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath
  10/20/15
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/12/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  09/15/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/11/12
...
salmon mad cow disease site
  04/12/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  07/13/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/14/12
i smoke cocks. not bragging. just being.
Offensive goal in life
  02/10/12
1s agin the best poast itt
passionate sadistic brunch
  02/10/12
Wrong. For example, there are tons of empirical studies show...
stirring new version jap
  02/10/12
nice "pretending to not know that ssm is flame/retarded...
carmine big-titted incel quadroon
  02/10/12
someone's gotta feed the fire man
stirring new version jap
  02/10/12
Fairness includes ideological preference. All I am trying to...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/10/12
...
salmon mad cow disease site
  05/06/12
Apt, timely example: United States v. Jones. Whatever tha...
insane hairraiser hell
  02/10/12
Thank you brother. Also, can you discuss whether Justice ...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/10/12
FROM A JOB OPPORTUNITY--BASICALLY PROVES JUDGES DECIDE CASE...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  02/26/12
Your position is interesting, and perhaps even persuasive, b...
Bateful cuck
  04/14/12
Why, brother? Where you been?
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/14/12
Just messing with you man. I've been in lurk mode lately ma...
Bateful cuck
  04/14/12
How is California legal practice treating u, brother?
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/14/12
I like it for the most part man. I'm getting put on some fai...
Bateful cuck
  04/14/12
ahh nice, brother. Are you trying to open up your own place ...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/14/12
that would be awesome, but I don't think I'm entrepreneurial...
Bateful cuck
  04/14/12
pretty easy argument when you define fairness as anything th...
Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath
  04/14/12
Your sophistication on these matters is utterly rudimentary....
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/14/12
explain in a cogent sentence please
Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath
  04/14/12
http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  04/14/12
that's not a sentence brother. whose supreme court justic...
Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath
  04/14/12
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  05/23/12
...
sienna greedy sound barrier
  10/07/12
...
sienna greedy sound barrier
  10/16/12
miss this guy
Slate Ceo
  03/27/14
...
Bateful cuck
  12/12/14
NFL refs too
violent base organic girlfriend
  10/06/15
...
Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building
  10/20/15
...
Galvanic gunner
  10/20/15
...
Zombie-like lodge
  04/07/17
...
Slimy den tank
  05/26/18
...
Zombie-like lodge
  06/27/18
...
Slimy den tank
  09/20/18
This is a question of legal philosophy. See “The Case of the...
thriller flesh sex offender milk
  09/20/18
Honestly, I agree, especially at the appellate level. If th...
dark swashbuckling wrinkle station
  09/20/18


Poast new message in this thread



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 12:02 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Any credible disagreement with this proposition?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19930168)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:16 PM
Author: Sick pontificating sanctuary gaping

Did they not teach you about equity vs law? In old England they actually had two kinds of courts. One that ruled based on law and other that ruled based on fairness.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931572)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 8:38 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

See, e.g., JEFFREY A. SEGAL & HAROLD J. SPAETH, THE SUPREME COURT AND THE ATTITUDINAL MODEL (2001) (arguing that Supreme Court Justices decide cases based on political attitudes

and values rather than on legal considerations).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933309)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 1:55 AM
Author: Heady very tactful generalized bond gas station

You think Segal and Spaeth haven't been criticized many times in the literature? Are you just now coming across this citation? Lol, brother, lol.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935652)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 2:02 AM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

I still think they're right, as flawed as their study might be in this way or that

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935681)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 23rd, 2012 2:13 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

http://www.hairfinder.com/celebrityhairstyles2/sarah-shahi2.jpg

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#21155031)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 6th, 2015 12:30 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#28910878)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 22nd, 2012 12:38 PM
Author: 180 preventive strike

Gross simplification of British law.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20267597)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 3:34 AM
Author: Chartreuse cruel-hearted native police squad

I tend to agree with slim. However, there are the rare occurrences when Judges rule in accordance with procedural law that results in an otherwise inequitable outcome. During the rare instances that I'm working on the defense side, I shoot for the quick technical win and sometimes you get the job done with the support from the Judge, all the while knowing that the other side clearly has merit.

I would hope that fairness dictates our judicial processes, but what is fairness? To say that ulterior motives are never a factor is to say that Judges are inhuman machines.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935879)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 8:26 AM
Author: Light persian

he is absolutely correct if you replace "fair" with "whatever the judge thinks is the "right" answer"

anyone who disputes this is a fucking retard.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19936282)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 8:47 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

TYFT, brother. I agree whole-heartedly. Care to elaborate?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19939799)



Reply Favorite

Date: December 21st, 2012 11:18 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#22294286)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 12:06 PM
Author: wonderful sable windowlicker

false (see dismissals on basis of statute of limitations procedural errors etc)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19930195)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 12:09 PM
Author: twinkling glittery hall

cr

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19930213)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 12:09 PM
Author: razzmatazz office

provide please several citations to such dismissals along with a cogent and succinct summary of each case.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19930216)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 12:13 PM
Author: mind-boggling garrison mother



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19930248)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:16 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Duh! Those obvious cases are where the judge just applies the law. But in hard cases like Romer v Evans, Heller, and so forth, a decision is made on the basis of fairness.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931274)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:05 PM
Author: cerebral nudist stag film volcanic crater

procedural defects aren't always clear-cut

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931518)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:06 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

So do judges decide the bar on successive motions of habeas relief on the basis of fairness?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931520)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:08 PM
Author: cerebral nudist stag film volcanic crater

don't know, don't care

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931531)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 16th, 2015 12:44 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#28766995)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 21st, 2012 10:47 AM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20257024)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:43 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

I find 'fairness' a weird name for what you're getting at

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932013)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 8:08 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

What's a better word? I am trying to say that a judge decides cases on the basis of his own personal view as to what the best/just outcome should be according to his own peculiar worldview.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933138)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 8:31 AM
Author: Light persian

you are 100% correct



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19936288)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 17th, 2012 9:00 AM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

whats a better word then?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20481268)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 22nd, 2012 11:58 AM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20267364)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:23 PM
Author: multi-colored mood

most procedural errors are corrected via motion for leave to amend.

it can be argued that it is fair not to subject someone to suit after a significant amount of time (the limitations period) has passed.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931301)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:24 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Very cogent, brother. Expand a little please.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931304)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:27 PM
Author: multi-colored mood

no

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931325)



Reply Favorite

Date: December 21st, 2012 11:33 PM
Author: Histrionic Magical Halford Trust Fund

lol

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#22294360)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 7th, 2017 11:03 PM
Author: Zombie-like lodge



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#33022612)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:48 PM
Author: Shivering digit ratio really tough guy

(says something unintelligent about equitable tolling)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932040)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:41 PM
Author: wonderful sable windowlicker

Even tolling is applied according to fairly rigid doctrines. OP's assertion is garbage at the trial court level where courts don't stray much from the rules and doctrines set forth from above. Obviously the Supreme Court is more likely to take account of fluffy policy considerations.

I guess it depends on how you define fairness. I believe OP is trying to argue that courts don't follow precedent or doctrines and make decisions according to their notions of justice and good policy which really isn't all that true at the lower court levels.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933674)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:42 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

How about at the COA and SCOTUS level?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933679)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 12:09 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

what an idiot

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19930214)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:32 PM
Author: Navy range

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Reynolds

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931347)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:33 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

What about Maher Arar, brother?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931355)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:37 PM
Author: cracking legend principal's office

uh, by definition, thats what equity courts are supposed to do.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931372)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 3:57 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

even for courts of chancery, they decide on the basis of fairness

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931470)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:50 PM
Author: cracking legend principal's office

if chancery is the same as equity, then yes, that is the legal standard they apply: what is fair.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932054)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:26 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933582)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:51 PM
Author: Shivering digit ratio really tough guy

well duh, they're courts of chancery

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932067)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 23rd, 2012 11:18 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#21645753)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:02 PM
Author: salmon mad cow disease site

Twist: the law is fair

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931502)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:04 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

if law was fair, this guy would have gotten monetary relief.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931513)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:07 PM
Author: salmon mad cow disease site

But Slim, what argument that proceeding w his litigation severely impairs post-9/11 American foreign policy? I.e., fairer to protect American people than this dood. Your take?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931528)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:09 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

The invocation of the State Secret privilege in this case was invoked disingeniously.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931537)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:11 PM
Author: salmon mad cow disease site

That statement standing alone seems a little conclusory. Describe why if you could

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931550)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:34 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

read david cole's brief man. He litigated the case on appeal to the 2nd cir. with CCR

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931671)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 30th, 2015 9:40 AM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#28867546)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:11 PM
Author: Ebony whorehouse affirmative action

to be fair, no (see bush v. gore)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931546)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:11 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

ya that was decided on the basis of fairness

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931549)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:11 PM
Author: salmon mad cow disease site

Sarcasm?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931553)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:12 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

the conservative bloc thought it was fair to give the election to bush.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931556)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:15 PM
Author: salmon mad cow disease site

But you didn't think it was. amirite

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931565)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 8:38 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

See, e.g., JEFFREY A. SEGAL & HAROLD J. SPAETH, THE SUPREME COURT AND THE ATTITUDINAL MODEL (2001) (arguing that Supreme Court Justices decide cases based on political attitudes

and values rather than on legal considerations

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933314)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 20th, 2015 5:37 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#29008298)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 13th, 2012 2:30 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20195801)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:12 PM
Author: Ebony whorehouse affirmative action

lol, just lol

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931554)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:15 PM
Author: french rehab

Korematsu v. US

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931567)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 4:30 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

fairness again

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931650)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:39 PM
Author: french rehab

Korematsu would disagree with you.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19931987)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:42 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

then what did they decide the case on ? not on the law...on the basis of exigency and thus fairness

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932005)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:49 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

exigency =/= fairness.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932046)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:55 PM
Author: french rehab

titocr

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932082)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 5:50 PM
Author: french rehab

define fairness, brother. is fairness some intangible, public good which usurps the individual's rights in exigent circumstances? please provide no less than 3 cogent, relevant examples in an expeditious manner. ty

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19932052)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 8:07 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

See, e.g., JEFFREY A. SEGAL & HAROLD J. SPAETH, THE SUPREME COURT AND THE ATTITUDINAL MODEL (2001) (arguing that Supreme Court Justices decide cases based on political attitudes

and values rather than on legal considerations)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933128)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:32 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

attitudes/values =/= fairness

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933610)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:33 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

You've never noticed that your COA judge decides on the basis of fairness a given complaint?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933614)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:35 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

attitudes are not fairness, brother. also, my judge (who I'm not working for yet) always seems to agree with the other judges on their panels, and I find it hard to believe they all have the same views about the "fairness" of this or that. but they do agree on the law

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933625)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:37 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

I know the law might suggest an outcome, but ultimately, in the hard cases, don't you think the judges just think that their reasoning is outcome-driven?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933639)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:38 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

why the fuck does that matter, a hard case by definition is one where the law has probably run out

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933648)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:39 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Hard cases are where the stakes tend to be extremely high on both sides, and in which decisions on the basis of fairness are most often generated.

Thoughts on DeShaney v. Winnebago County? Read that case. notice how the Justices decide the merits on the basis of their personal vision of fairness.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933655)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:45 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

but you see, that's a HARD CASE about which the constitution really says absolutely nothing one way or another, so yeah, what else are you going to rely on but your personal vision of the law

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933695)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:46 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

There you go, brother. You just recognized my point. Have you ever read the Legal Realists like Alan Watson? They sort of make the same point. I am advocating a Crit position a la Duncan Kennedy, Roberto Unger or Mark Tushnet (i.e. a strong indeterminacy argument).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933705)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:51 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

but strong indeterminacy is bullshit, 99% of law is settled

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933744)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:53 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

I just fucking said that. Christ.

Thoughts on Critical Legal Studies?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933755)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:54 PM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

you so did not just fucking say that

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933767)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 9th, 2012 9:56 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Oh apologies, brother. I meant I was NOT advocating Crit. Thoughts on Crit theory?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19933787)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 20th, 2015 6:34 PM
Author: Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#29008620)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 12th, 2012 11:40 AM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20446400)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 15th, 2012 1:09 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#21584875)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 11th, 2012 6:32 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20441378)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 12th, 2012 11:43 AM
Author: salmon mad cow disease site



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20446416)



Reply Favorite

Date: July 13th, 2012 10:58 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#21081826)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 3:52 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462006)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 2:03 AM
Author: Offensive goal in life

i smoke cocks. not bragging. just being.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935686)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 3:14 AM
Author: passionate sadistic brunch

1s agin the best poast itt

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935822)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 2:41 AM
Author: stirring new version jap

Wrong. For example, there are tons of empirical studies showing a strong correlation between the outcome of case and a judges political preference. These studies are all based off of published opinions (17% of all federal circuit court decisions are published... yes, this is the actual statistic), which include almost all of the "hard cases." If you believe these studies have at least some value, then it becomes pretty clear fairness alone is an oversimplification.

Posner has written extensively on this. Its really a combination of many things - pragmatism, ideological identity, legalism, sociology, etc. Way too many factors influence judges decision to say it comes down to "fairness."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935767)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 2:43 AM
Author: carmine big-titted incel quadroon

nice "pretending to not know that ssm is flame/retarded/both" schtick

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935769)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 2:47 AM
Author: stirring new version jap

someone's gotta feed the fire man

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19935775)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 8:59 AM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Fairness includes ideological preference. All I am trying to say--and to which you agree with--is that judges don't apply the law like its some brooding "thing" in the sky.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19936326)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 6th, 2012 3:35 PM
Author: salmon mad cow disease site



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20628241)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 11:36 AM
Author: insane hairraiser hell

Apt, timely example: United States v. Jones.

Whatever that mess of opinions actually establishes, it is a significant departure from settled Fourth Amendment doctrine. The Court just got creeped out by the "Big Brother" feel to it, and fished around for some way to say that the cops can't do that. Totally based on gut rxn, not sensible principles. Also, wrong, IMO.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19936767)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 10th, 2012 11:40 AM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Thank you brother.

Also, can you discuss whether Justice Alito's concurrence is based on notions of fairness?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#19936784)



Reply Favorite

Date: February 26th, 2012 12:59 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

FROM A JOB OPPORTUNITY--BASICALLY PROVES JUDGES DECIDE CASES ON THE BASIS OF FAIRNESS

The normal procedure followed by a judge in working with a law clerk on a decision or order is to discuss the case with the law clerk, advise him/her of the decision and approach to be taken, as well as to discuss the style in which the decision or order is to be written. The law clerk then independently conducts the necessary research and prepares the draft decision or order for the judge's review. Outstanding critical analysis and writing skills are therefore essential. Law clerks will have the opportunity to sit in on parts of trials, oral arguments and mediations.

It is highly preferable for candidates to have taken the bar exam prior to commencing their clerkships. Appointees commencing work prior to passing the bar exam are designated by the Office of Personnel Management as "Law Clerk" – a designation that cannot under any circumstances exceed 14 months and cannot be extended. This means that the appointee must pass the bar exam before the 14-month period ends. Once admitted to the bar of any state, the appointee’s designation is converted to "Attorney Advisor."

The FERC law clerk position requires a firm two-year commitment. The energy field is highly technical and requires substantial training to achieve competence. Once achieved, however, this competence affords our attorney advisors highly coveted and otherwise unavailable employment opportunities, both within the agency and in prestigious private law firms throughout the country. FERC law clerks typically receive multiple job offers within weeks of becoming eligible to interview (after twenty-two (22) months of service).

As a general rule the starting grade for law clerks at FERC is GS-11, currently starting at $62,467, where one or more of the following apply:

(1) Top third of law school graduating class.

(2) Member, Law Review.

(3) Member, Order of the Coif.

(4) Winner of moot court competition; member of law school moot court team.

(5) Full-time or continuous participation in a legal aid program.

(6) Significant summer law office clerk experience, particularly in the economic or energy regulatory fields.

(7) Other equivalent evidence of superior achievement.

Law clerks also receive such annual cost of living increases as may be approved by the Congress each January. In addition, if performing at the fully successful level at the end of the first year, the law clerk will be eligible for promotion to GS-12, currently starting at $74,872 (plus any cost of living increases).

GEOGRAPHIC PREFERENCE

Washington Metro Area

POSITION TYPE

Entry Level Attorney

DESIRED APPLICANT TYPE

Current Student, Alumni

LOCATION(S)

City

Washington

State/Province

District of Columbia

Country

United States

COMPENSATION

See description section.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20057958)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 3:58 PM
Author: Bateful cuck

Your position is interesting, and perhaps even persuasive, but I'm not sure that it is COGENT.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462036)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 3:59 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Why, brother? Where you been?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462037)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:06 PM
Author: Bateful cuck

Just messing with you man. I've been in lurk mode lately man. Not poasting much. I guess I'm just haven't been feeling inspired enough to participate in the noble dialogue.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462068)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:07 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

How is California legal practice treating u, brother?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462073)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:17 PM
Author: Bateful cuck

I like it for the most part man. I'm getting put on some fairly interesting cases for how small the firm is.

Kinda stressing about developing a NICHE to separate myself from the general lit riffraff so I can lateral in a few years. Been trying to focus on environmental cases and the "business tort" cases (intentional interference with K, trade libel, etc.)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462128)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:18 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

ahh nice, brother. Are you trying to open up your own place in the Bay Area?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462136)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:40 PM
Author: Bateful cuck

that would be awesome, but I don't think I'm entrepreneurial enough. Would love to just lateral to a small firm in the Bay that does quality litigation, brother.

Are you working these days, brother?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462250)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:01 PM
Author: Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath

pretty easy argument when you define fairness as anything the judge bases his opinion on

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462042)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:07 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

Your sophistication on these matters is utterly rudimentary.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462074)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:08 PM
Author: Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath

explain in a cogent sentence please

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462082)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:09 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building

http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1463&context=ilj

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462087)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 14th, 2012 4:16 PM
Author: Unholy Odious Rigor Public Bath

that's not a sentence brother.

whose supreme court justice's writing do you most admire brother

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20462126)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 23rd, 2012 10:00 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#20754774)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 7th, 2012 7:25 PM
Author: sienna greedy sound barrier



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#21736756)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 16th, 2012 7:06 PM
Author: sienna greedy sound barrier



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#21803706)



Reply Favorite

Date: March 27th, 2014 10:56 AM
Author: Slate Ceo

miss this guy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#25270436)



Reply Favorite

Date: December 12th, 2014 4:59 PM
Author: Bateful cuck



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#26918434)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 6th, 2015 12:37 PM
Author: violent base organic girlfriend

NFL refs too

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#28910900)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 20th, 2015 5:41 PM
Author: Laughsome Athletic Conference Church Building



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#29008326)



Reply Favorite

Date: October 20th, 2015 6:22 PM
Author: Galvanic gunner



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#29008554)



Reply Favorite

Date: April 7th, 2017 11:02 PM
Author: Zombie-like lodge



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#33022599)



Reply Favorite

Date: May 26th, 2018 10:23 PM
Author: Slimy den tank



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#36133889)



Reply Favorite

Date: June 27th, 2018 12:17 PM
Author: Zombie-like lodge



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#36319016)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 20th, 2018 1:37 PM
Author: Slimy den tank



(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#36849122)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 20th, 2018 1:43 PM
Author: thriller flesh sex offender milk

This is a question of legal philosophy. See “The Case of the Speluncean Explorers” and analysis for further reading.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#36849153)



Reply Favorite

Date: September 20th, 2018 1:44 PM
Author: dark swashbuckling wrinkle station

Honestly, I agree, especially at the appellate level. If there is any gray area and it could go either way, it is going the way they think is the right answer/consistent with their politics and views.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1869594&forum_id=2#36849165)