Wednesday, October 19, 2016 7:57:02 PM
If she makes a decision based on the election, then she is involved in the election. If she makes a decision based on the case, she is not involved in the election. It doesn't really matter how it is "construed" by outsiders. You will always have people accusing judges of pretty much everything under the sun. In the end, all that matters is what is "reasonable".
"all comes down to Sweeney's interpretation and decision about who she feels would be harmed more."
Yes...exactly. Sweeney must interpret who she believes would be harmed more and rule in their favor when it comes to procedural issues like an extension. The election should not come into the decision. In the end, it was argued that the plaintiff is barely harmed by a 31 day extension where the defense would be gravely harmed without it. Sweeney agreed.
"This is an unprecedented case and an unprecedented election."
Both statements are true...though unrelated (at least if you believe in the Constitution).
VHAI - Vocodia Partners with Leading Political Super PACs to Revolutionize Fundraising Efforts • VHAI • Sep 19, 2024 11:48 AM
Dear Cashmere Group Holding Co. AKA Swifty Global Signs Binding Letter of Intent to be Acquired by Signing Day Sports • DRCR • Sep 19, 2024 10:26 AM
HealthLynked Launches Virtual Urgent Care Through Partnership with Lyric Health. • HLYK • Sep 19, 2024 8:00 AM
Element79 Gold Corp. Appoints Kevin Arias as Advisor to the Board of Directors, Strengthening Strategic Leadership • ELMGF • Sep 18, 2024 10:29 AM
Mawson Finland Limited Further Expands the Known Mineralized Zones at Rajapalot: Palokas step-out drills 7 metres @ 9.1 g/t gold & 706 ppm cobalt • MFL • Sep 17, 2024 9:02 AM
PickleJar Announces Integration With OptCulture to Deliver Holistic Fan Experiences at Venue Point of Sale • PKLE • Sep 17, 2024 8:00 AM