The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

**44 AMP** · October 19, 2008, 11:13 PM

SCOTUS vacated the TRO because they say the issuing court doesn't have authority over the issue? And they make no judgement about whether or not the issue is valid, only that the court involved doesn't have the authority to decide it (and issue a TRO)? Is that correct?

I'm not a lawyer, and never claimed to be, so sometimes the finer points, and even the underlying principles of these thing get past me in the legal jargon. SO, am I understanding this right, or have I missed something?

Anyone...? Anyone?....Bueler?.....

October 19, 2008, 11:13 PM	#5
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,846	So, if I read this right.... SCOTUS vacated the TRO because they say the issuing court doesn't have authority over the issue? And they make no judgement about whether or not the issue is valid, only that the court involved doesn't have the authority to decide it (and issue a TRO)? Is that correct? I'm not a lawyer, and never claimed to be, so sometimes the finer points, and even the underlying principles of these thing get past me in the legal jargon. SO, am I understanding this right, or have I missed something? Anyone...? Anyone?....Bueler?..... __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.