S
SmarterThanYou
Guest
Here we go, first off there's former Interior Department Solicitor William Myers being nominated for the 9th circuit. Ok, we all know that the 9th circuit could certainly use some balance in it but what the hell are republicans thinking going around saying this guy is highly qualified? He's NEVER been a judge, NEVER participated in a jury trial, and has only a few appearances before non-jury proceedings or appeals. Ok, maybe that last part gives him SOME experience but certainly not enough for U.S. district court seat. Now, one of the things that this nominee has going for him is his position on private property rights as long as it goes against the federal governments position. Curiously, most of those positions were in direct opposition with laws passed under the clinton adminstration. Talk about judicial activism.
Soon after that we have U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle. Talk about a piece of work. Even the conservative Fourth Circuit has chided Judge Boyle for going too far, repeatedly reversing or criticizing him for subverting basic procedural rules and misconstruing clear legal principles.
Judge Boyle has been reversed over 120 times by the Fourth Circuit, a rate far in excess of the average judge. In Ellis v. North Carolina, he threw out an employment discrimination case, saying that state employers were immune from suit. Because the Supreme Court had come to the opposite conclusion long before, the Fourth Circuit summarily reversed the decision in a three-paragraph, unpublished opinion. After restrictively applying procedural rules and again holding that the state enjoyed immunity, Judge Boyle dismissed another case where African Americans claimed that state officials were intentionally placing landfills in areas adversely affecting them. Again, the Fourth Circuit reversed, criticizing both Judge Boyles procedural and immunity rulings.
Flame away people.
Soon after that we have U.S. District Judge Terrence Boyle. Talk about a piece of work. Even the conservative Fourth Circuit has chided Judge Boyle for going too far, repeatedly reversing or criticizing him for subverting basic procedural rules and misconstruing clear legal principles.
Judge Boyle has been reversed over 120 times by the Fourth Circuit, a rate far in excess of the average judge. In Ellis v. North Carolina, he threw out an employment discrimination case, saying that state employers were immune from suit. Because the Supreme Court had come to the opposite conclusion long before, the Fourth Circuit summarily reversed the decision in a three-paragraph, unpublished opinion. After restrictively applying procedural rules and again holding that the state enjoyed immunity, Judge Boyle dismissed another case where African Americans claimed that state officials were intentionally placing landfills in areas adversely affecting them. Again, the Fourth Circuit reversed, criticizing both Judge Boyles procedural and immunity rulings.
Flame away people.
