Skip to main content

View Diary: The Latest: First Look at Plame/Wilson Complaint (Update IV) (112 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  1998 (0+ / 0-)

    Supreme Court denied cert in a case that had a split in the circuits and argued points of law that hadn't ever been decided before.  They are supposed to hear those cases, but as the court of appeals before them, rubberstamped the trial judge, who wrote a 23 page decision without citing any case law, not one single case.  It was gobbldygook about everything he'd ruled couldn't be brought as evidence in my case and the evidence for the time that was allowed to be part of the hole....didn't even talk about it.  Still, he let me have the trial (no jury) and there were some Perry Mason moments.  He ruled that I had been a whistle-blower and what happened to me was because of that fact.  However, he said the "officials" had sovereign immunity, ignoring that the congress specifically said in the law I went to court under that the government could be sued. Even in England it was determined the King could be sued.  My case was heard in Missouri that does recognize common law.  Had the sovereign immunity thing been raised before the ruling, we could have disputed it as in Federal law, if there's no law, then the law of the state is considered.    

    Winning without Delay.

    by ljm on Thu Jul 13, 2006 at 02:45:28 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site