REGARDLESS OF HOW WEAK THE ARGUMENT THAT NOT DEALING WITH THINGS LIKE REDUCING THE TIME TO SERVE THE COMPLAINT BY THE LOWER COURTS COMPLIES WITH THE "GOOD BEHAVIOR" REQUIREMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE YOU CAN STILL DO YOUR THING, THE ACTIONS OF THOSE COURTS ON THE MERIT SIDE INVOLVED DIRECT DENIAL OR WRONG THE PLAINTIFF CAN FIND NO WAY AROUND IT. SO HOW THE SUPREME CRAP NOT DEALING WITH THAT CAN BE SEEN AS A COMPLIANCE WITH THE "GOOD BEHAVIOR" REQUIREMENT EVEN IF IT WANTS TO APPLY ITS DISCRETION LIKE CRAP?
No comments:
Post a Comment