10-04-2010, 09:20 PM
Well, aside from the snarking, you may want to do a bit of research into this 'recent' hullabaloo (which has been a recurrent theme since 2007). Hellooooo... election ?
It appears that Justice Thomas's approach is to actually listen to the case rather than make semi-judgmental 'questions', and save his debate and dialogue for the actual case as presented.
Having listened to some of the discussions in some of the cases via other sources, it appears that the most frequent questioners are trying to force their pre-ordained decision on the Court, or at least attempt their debate with their fellow justices while the case is being heard.
AND that is not how it's supposed to go. They are supposed to listen, and only ask questions when the case desperately needs them. If the lawyers presenting the case fail to hit the points that are needed, the court should find appropriately, not elicit more information from them.
But that's my opinion, I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.
It appears that Justice Thomas's approach is to actually listen to the case rather than make semi-judgmental 'questions', and save his debate and dialogue for the actual case as presented.
Having listened to some of the discussions in some of the cases via other sources, it appears that the most frequent questioners are trying to force their pre-ordained decision on the Court, or at least attempt their debate with their fellow justices while the case is being heard.
AND that is not how it's supposed to go. They are supposed to listen, and only ask questions when the case desperately needs them. If the lawyers presenting the case fail to hit the points that are needed, the court should find appropriately, not elicit more information from them.
But that's my opinion, I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.