Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I believe she is the first ever to have a ruling struck down............She didn’t over step her bounds either. She made a ruling. Right or wrong, making eh decision was properly hers. A higher court said she was wrong. That’s all.
Thing is, the higher court said she had no authority to make any decision.She didn’t over step her bounds either. She made a ruling. Right or wrong, making eh decision was properly hers. A higher court said she was wrong. That’s all.
Like many before her had.Thing is, the higher court said she had no authority to make any decision.
So yes, she did overstep her bounds.
Few can compare to Cannon’s complete fail in her decision. It was an epically bad ruling.Like many before her had.
Whoopee ding.
Few can compare to Cannon’s complete fail in her decision. It was an epically bad ruling.
Oh okay. Fine. You win. Cannon’s decision is on par with Dread Scott.Dred Scott v. John F.A. Sandford
Yeah, right.......happens dude. Not the first, not the last.
No win, pal......just quit spreading BS.Oh okay. Fine. You win. Cannon’s decision is on par with Dread Scott.
Just don’t pretend her Cannon’s decision was anything other than partisan hackery.No win, pal......just quit spreading BS.
Being as you nor I were involved in her decision, how can we come to that conclusion then?Just don’t pretend her Cannon’s decision was anything other than partisan hackery.
Because it was so incredibly wrong. Either she’s a partisan hack or she’s a moron.Being as you nor I were involved in her decision, how can we come to that conclusion then?
With that said, you can refute her decision?Because it was so incredibly wrong. Either she’s a partisan hack or she’s a moron.
She’s not a moron.
I can direct you to the opinion of the appeals court which tore apart her decision as completely wrong.With that said, you can refute her decision?
And they claim she is a partisan hack?I can direct you to the opinion of the appeals court which tore apart her decision as completely wrong.
They accused her of making up new rules just because he’s Trump.And they claim she is a partisan hack?
Looks like you missed a few things. Funny, no mention of her making up rules just for Trump.They accused her of making up new rules just because he’s Trump.
That’s not being a partisan hack? I think it is.
Did you read the decision from the court of appeals?Looks like you missed a few things. Funny, no mention of her making up rules just for Trump.