Campy Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 True...but the question then begs, why even hear the case? Why not just say "This is an issue between the school board and parents, and will not be considered by this court"? 506893[/snapback] I'll take "What is because they're the Ninth" for $100 please Alex. I think it died in the Senate without a vote last year, but isn't there another bill out there trying to break up the Ninth and placing AK, OR, WA, and some other states into a newly formed Twelfth? Methinks I read that a week or two ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 True...but the question then begs, why even hear the case? Why not just say "This is an issue between the school board and parents, and will not be considered by this court"? 506893[/snapback] Well, dismissal for failure to state a claim is pretty close to that. That was done by the trial court first and then the circuit court on appeal by the parents. I think they had recourse to an appeal as a matter of right. They didn't have the disecretion not to hear it. Maybe they could have just said "Affirmed" and left it at that but I don't know. In state court in NY the appellate courts often do that in run of the mill cases. I think they did say that this was not the proper forum for addressing whether they should have done the study, ie, the proper forum was the PTA or school board meetings and the like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 I'll take "What is because they're the Ninth" for $100 please Alex. I think it died in the Senate without a vote last year, but isn't there another bill out there trying to break up the Ninth and placing AK, OR, WA, and some other states into a newly formed Twelfth? Methinks I read that a week or two ago. 506899[/snapback] No, it was decided by two Judges from the Ninth and one from the Eighth so all together it was a decison by the 8.666666th Circuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 True...but the question then begs, why even hear the case? Why not just say "This is an issue between the school board and parents, and will not be considered by this court"? 506893[/snapback] I know little about the formalities of appeals, but my guess is this: If they dismissed it without comment then the rodeo would have raged unabated. Debating whether the 9th circuit is evil and activist and liberal is popular enough without adding fresh logs to the fire. I think they laid out their reasoning to make clear why it was being rejected. Of course, IMO they should have simply returned the paperwork with your explanation written across the front in red pen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 I understand that the plaintiffs were arguing that they had exclusive rights in regards their children's education and I agree that they are probably wrong IMHO about that. I do not have a problem with the 1st part of the ruling, but do have a problem with the next sentence (the one that starts "we also hold"). 506643[/snapback] Fair enough. That and Mickey's explanation will take some mulling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 America’s parents are now being told that, if they choose to educate their children in the public schools, they forfeit any fundamental right to control the education of their own children. Nice. The big lesson here is the fact that a federal appeals court dared to hand down such a decision and to cloak its assault on parental rights in language that gives government officials virtual carte blanche over the sexual education of children. Look at it anyway you like Mickey, its !@#$. Before the surveys were administered, parents signed consent forms. But the consent forms never mentioned that sex would be a topic.The split of this Court will be good news when it happens. 506600[/snapback] By that logic they are also being told that, if they choose to live in this country, they forfeit any fundamental right to control the laws they live under. Quick, everybody - to the militia arsenal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Quick, everybody - to the militia arsenal! 506976[/snapback] It's no use, I've just returned from the Magazine. Governor Dunmore's marines have siezed the colony's powder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 It's no use, I've just returned from the Magazine. Governor Dunmore's marines have siezed the colony's powder. 506988[/snapback] Then I will have to rely on my trusty tin-foil headgear to carry me through this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts