The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
the SCOTUS case u never heard of that's gonna assfuck Trump in Shitcago
| frum learning disabled brunch | 10/25/25 |
| Hyperventilating excitant parlor | 10/25/25 |
| brass odious point | 10/26/25 |
| big-titted degenerate new version | 10/26/25 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 25th, 2025 11:34 PM Author: frum learning disabled brunch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Chicago_v._Morales (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5789887&forum_id=2Reputation#49375165) |
Date: October 25th, 2025 11:44 PM Author: Hyperventilating excitant parlor Be careful what you wish for, this ugly case could end up overturning Marks analysis. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5789887&forum_id=2Reputation#49375181) |
 |
Date: October 26th, 2025 12:42 AM Author: brass odious point That's the 'narrowest holding controls' rule for determining which of the 4 plurality opinions the rehnquist court loved writing controls, right?
Why is that not something scotus is expected to make clear on the front end? Just have the rule be: if 5 justices won't sign onto a one-sentence opinion saying "Parts I-III, V.A, V.B, and VII of JUSTICE KAVANAUGH'S opinion, and Part IV of JUSTICE BARRETT'S opinion, have precedential force for purposes of stare decisis", then the opinion is a single-ride ticket. |
|
Date: October 26th, 2025 12:33 AM Author: big-titted degenerate new version man that's stretching it beyond recognition
|