Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: McAuliffe to name Roush to state Supreme Court

  1. #1
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    McAuliffe to name Roush to state Supreme Court

    Ok legal folks, is this good, bad or indifferent?

    The article says McAuliffe is timing the appointment to prevent the General Assembly from picking the replacement, so it can't be very good...

    TFred

    McAuliffe to name Roush to state Supreme Court

    Jane Marum Roush, a veteran Fairfax County circuit judge who has presided at such high-profile trials as that of Beltway sniper Lee Boyd Malvo, is Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s pick for a seat on the Virginia Supreme Court, according to three state government sources.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Does anybody think the Rs have the courage?

    Her appointment will require General Assembly confirmation.
    If the GA fails to confirm,
    a) McAukiffe can keep submitting her till they give in
    b) show the GA the name of someone even less agreeable

    I am not aware of anything that says the court must be composed of the maximum allowable number of justices. Doing so primarily avoids the possibility of a nullity because of an even number of votes for and against.

    I was most impressed during the Fx County Beltway Sniper trial how she handled the press. The prosecution of the case pretty much could have been phoned in, including defeating the initial plea of NG by reason of insanity considering the confessions stood even after the NGRI pleas were withdrawn.

    We'll have to look at her record to see if anything stands out besides being a staunch D. My quick search only comes up with the Disthene case as being worthy of special note. http://mccandlishlawyers.com/resourc...olders-rights/ (Progressivism in play)

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  3. #3
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373
    I've known Judge Roush for a long time, but I have no clue as to her leanings on defense rights issues. I regard that as a good sign. I was talking with another attorney today about this appointment, and we agreed that she definitely has the right stuff to be a great appellate judge, and that she'd probably be better at that than she is at managing circuit court trials (though she's pretty good at that). She scores highly on my "intellectual honesty" scale. We know a couple of judges who have a tendency to just make stuff up when they want a decision to go a particular way (that the law would not allow) - she doesn't do stuff like that. I have a lot more confidence in her ability and willingness to apply the law fairly and even-handedly than I would most judges. I hope her performance on the bench will justify that opinion.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  4. #4
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    http://www.dailypress.com/news/polit...802-story.html

    GOP says no to McAuliffe Supreme Court pick, will tap Alston instead

    By*Travis FainDaily Presscontact the reporter

    Terry McAuliffeIllinois General AssemblyU.S. House of RepresentativesRepublican PartyU.S. Senate

    RICHMOND - General Assembly Republicans won't sign off on*Gov. Terry McAuliffe's pick for the state Supreme Court, they announced late Sunday, going instead with Appeals Court Judge Rossie D. Alston.

  5. #5
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    http://www.dailypress.com/news/polit...802-story.html

    GOP says no to McAuliffe Supreme Court pick, will tap Alston instead
    And THIS is what is wrong with the liberals of the world today. They claim to be blind to all segregational demographics, then they say this:

    “Republicans’ decision to throw a distinguished jurist of 23 years off of the Supreme Court with no job to return to is without precedent in Virginia history," Coy said in a statement Monday morning. "It is no surprise that Republicans in the General Assembly would politicize this process, but it’s a tragedy that it will cost Virginia the service of a qualified female Supreme Court justice.”

    As a friend of mine likes to say, Weapons Grade Hypocrisy.

    TFred

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Wait just a minnit! Are you saying that after a gooberment job there should be some other employment position she should be able to "return" to?

    And what about me? Why wasn't some high-paying job found for me when I left state employment?

    It's rassist, I tells ya!

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  7. #7
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Wait just a minnit! Are you saying that after a gooberment job there should be some other employment position she should be able to "return" to?

    And what about me? Why wasn't some high-paying job found for me when I left state employment?

    It's rassist, I tells ya!

    stay safe.
    From the Richmond Times-Dispatch story:

    Roush, 58, who had resigned the judgeship she held on the Fairfax Circuit Court since 1993, was sworn in as a justice Friday and has begun hearing cases. If legislative Republicans follow through on Alston, Roush will be replaced on the court and out of a job by mid-September, 30 days after the Virginia General Assembly convenes Aug. 17 for a special session on congressional redistricting.

    TFred

  8. #8
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373
    Here's a link to a petition I got from the Virginia Trial Lawyers' Association:

    https://www.change.org/p/virginia-le...ail_responsive

    I've decided that, of the two, I prefer to have Judge Roush on the bench. Rossie Alston is a very good trial judge, and I haven't heard anything bad about him as a Ct. Apps. judge. But Judge Roush is probably even better as an appellate justice than she has been as a trial judge, because she is comfortable with abstractions, analytical in her approach to things, and rigorous in her logic. I think it's a matter of thinking style, and of the two, I think Judge Roush would be a better candidate. I really don't see any political ramifications to that decision. I really can't understand what's really going on here.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    Here's a link to a petition I got from the Virginia Trial Lawyers' Association:

    https://www.change.org/p/virginia-le...ail_responsive

    I've decided that, of the two, I prefer to have Judge Roush on the bench. Rossie Alston is a very good trial judge, and I haven't heard anything bad about him as a Ct. Apps. judge. But Judge Roush is probably even better as an appellate justice than she has been as a trial judge, because she is comfortable with abstractions, analytical in her approach to things, and rigorous in her logic. I think it's a matter of thinking style, and of the two, I think Judge Roush would be a better candidate. I really don't see any political ramifications to that decision. I really can't understand what's really going on here.
    Politics. Its got nuthin' to do with her qualifications.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    SNIP But Judge Roush is probably even better as an appellate justice than she has been as a trial judge, because she is comfortable with abstractions, analytical in her approach to things, and rigorous in her logic.
    So was the current chief justice of SCOTUS. Then he switched his position on Obamacare. Now, that monstrosity is "the law of the land."
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  11. #11
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    I will admit I know nothing about the two candidates. But as noted, the candidates have nothing to do with this event. What I do know is that McAuliffe specifically and intentionally did NOT consult with the General Assembly leadership about his nomination (he claims he spoke to a few "key" Northern Virginia Republicans) even though he KNEW that their approval was required.

    In my opinion, he purposefully baited Roush with a necklace of "sympathy" based on the consequences to her personally if the Republicans did what they did. In other words, McAuliffe dared them to reject his nomination, believing surely they wouldn't make this woman a victim, and they responded in the proper way, by doing exactly that. Not that they set out to fire Roush, but to force McAuliffe learn what happens when he does not follow the rules. Roush is indeed the victim here, of McAuliffe for being used as political bait, not the Republican leadership for doing their jobs and calling him on it.

    This was a nose under the tent attempt - even though as User notes, perhaps with a perfectly fine nose. But you can bet if he had gotten away with it this time, the next move would have been a head, and maybe not one as acceptable....

    Am I a bit cynical? You betcha. I am sick and tired of these amoral and absolutely lawless people running our government.

    TFred
    Last edited by TFred; 08-09-2015 at 04:43 PM.

  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I will admit I know nothing about the two candidates. But as noted, the candidates have nothing to do with this event. What I do know is that McAuliffe specifically and intentionally did NOT consult with the General Assembly leadership about his nomination (he claims he spoke to a few "key" Northern Virginia Republicans) even though he KNEW that their approval was required.

    In my opinion, he purposefully baited Roush with a necklace of "sympathy" based on the consequences to her personally if the Republicans did what they did. In other words, McAuliffe dared them to reject his nomination, believing surely they wouldn't make this woman a victim, and they responded in the proper way, by doing exactly that. Not that they set out to fire Roush, but to force McAuliffe learn what happens when he does not follow the rules. Roush is indeed the victim here, of McAuliffe for being used as political bait, not the Republican leadership for doing their jobs and calling him on it.

    This was a nose under the tent attempt - even though as User notes, perhaps with a perfectly fine nose. But you can bet if he had gotten away with it this time, the next move would have been a head, and maybe not one as acceptable....

    Am I a bit cynical? You betcha. I am sick and tired of these amoral and absolutely lawless people running our government.

    TFred
    Aaaahhhhh. The light of day shines in. Thanks for opening the curtains, TFred.

    I've never trusted McAuliffe since he made bombastic, firebrand comments--obviously manipulative and pandering--back in the 90's when he was DNC chairman.
    .
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Northern Piedmont-Culpeper
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I will admit I know nothing about the two candidates. But as noted, the candidates have nothing to do with this event. What I do know is that McAuliffe specifically and intentionally did NOT consult with the General Assembly leadership about his nomination (he claims he spoke to a few "key" Northern Virginia Republicans) even though he KNEW that their approval was required.

    In my opinion, he purposefully baited Roush with a necklace of "sympathy" based on the consequences to her personally if the Republicans did what they did. In other words, McAuliffe dared them to reject his nomination, believing surely they wouldn't make this woman a victim, and they responded in the proper way, by doing exactly that. Not that they set out to fire Roush, but to force McAuliffe learn what happens when he does not follow the rules. Roush is indeed the victim here, of McAuliffe for being used as political bait, not the Republican leadership for doing their jobs and calling him on it.

    This was a nose under the tent attempt - even though as User notes, perhaps with a perfectly fine nose. But you can bet if he had gotten away with it this time, the next move would have been a head, and maybe not one as acceptable....

    Am I a bit cynical? You betcha. I am sick and tired of these amoral and absolutely lawless people running our government.

    TFred
    Excellent explanation, TFred. I would also argue that McAwful is practicing what has become the new Democrats battle plan: Ignore the checks and balances system, just put the nominee in the position without following the proper procedures and attempt to ram it through the legislature. If that doesn't work, make the nominee the victim of the evil Republican politicians and try and get public sentiment on your side. If it works, good for McAwful. If his plan doesn't work, he continues to paint the GA as evil and always thwarting his plans. The bigger question is which of these candidates is best for the issues of 2A in general and OC in particular?
    "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

  14. #14
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,610
    Quote Originally Posted by scooter348 View Post
    Excellent explanation, TFred. I would also argue that McAwful is practicing what has become the new Democrats battle plan: Ignore the checks and balances system, just put the nominee in the position without following the proper procedures and attempt to ram it through the legislature. If that doesn't work, make the nominee the victim of the evil Republican politicians and try and get public sentiment on your side. If it works, good for McAwful. If his plan doesn't work, he continues to paint the GA as evil and always thwarting his plans. The bigger question is which of these candidates is best for the issues of 2A in general and OC in particular?
    Isn't it a shame that tarring and feathering isn't an acceptable response? (purely rhetorical)
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  15. #15
    Regular Member wrearick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Va.
    Posts
    635
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I will admit I know nothing about the two candidates. But as noted, the candidates have nothing to do with this event. What I do know is that McAuliffe specifically and intentionally did NOT consult with the General Assembly leadership about his nomination (he claims he spoke to a few "key" Northern Virginia Republicans) even though he KNEW that their approval was required.

    In my opinion, he purposefully baited Roush with a necklace of "sympathy" based on the consequences to her personally if the Republicans did what they did. In other words, McAuliffe dared them to reject his nomination, believing surely they wouldn't make this woman a victim, and they responded in the proper way, by doing exactly that. Not that they set out to fire Roush, but to force McAuliffe learn what happens when he does not follow the rules. Roush is indeed the victim here, of McAuliffe for being used as political bait, not the Republican leadership for doing their jobs and calling him on it.

    This was a nose under the tent attempt - even though as User notes, perhaps with a perfectly fine nose. But you can bet if he had gotten away with it this time, the next move would have been a head, and maybe not one as acceptable....

    Am I a bit cynical? You betcha. I am sick and tired of these amoral and absolutely lawless people running our government.

    TFred
    +1

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    I will admit I know nothing about the two candidates. But as noted, the candidates have nothing to do with this event. What I do know is that McAuliffe specifically and intentionally did NOT consult with the General Assembly leadership about his nomination (he claims he spoke to a few "key" Northern Virginia Republicans) even though he KNEW that their approval was required.

    In my opinion, he purposefully baited Roush with a necklace of "sympathy" based on the consequences to her personally if the Republicans did what they did. In other words, McAuliffe dared them to reject his nomination, believing surely they wouldn't make this woman a victim, and they responded in the proper way, by doing exactly that. Not that they set out to fire Roush, but to force McAuliffe learn what happens when he does not follow the rules. Roush is indeed the victim here, of McAuliffe for being used as political bait, not the Republican leadership for doing their jobs and calling him on it.

    This was a nose under the tent attempt - even though as User notes, perhaps with a perfectly fine nose. But you can bet if he had gotten away with it this time, the next move would have been a head, and maybe not one as acceptable....

    Am I a bit cynical? You betcha. I am sick and tired of these amoral and absolutely lawless people running our government.

    TFred
    She is NOT a victim, She is a LAWYER.

    I doubt she will have a hard time finding employment.

  17. #17
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by va_tazdad View Post
    She is NOT a victim, She is a LAWYER.

    I doubt she will have a hard time finding employment.
    Perhaps a valid point, but she is certainly being played for one in the liberal news coverage of this story.

    TFred

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Northern Piedmont-Culpeper
    Posts
    176
    So are these lawyers sucking up to the judge? And why aren't any of them petitioning the Governor to withdraw his nomination? Better yet, why aren't any of them taking the Governor to task for not following the proper procedure in picking a nominee?

    http://www.fredericksburg.com/news/v...e747183e8.html
    "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

  19. #19
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Irony

    Quote Originally Posted by va_tazdad View Post
    She is NOT a victim, She is a LAWYER.

    I doubt she will have a hard time finding employment.
    She is definitely not a victim. She is a lawyer who accepted a position that was not conveyed to her by the legislature, and thus was subject to a legislative over-ride. The document that identifies the legislature as having the final say in judicial appointments is the Virginia Constitution, the very same foundation document that justices of the Virginia Supreme Court must rule upon. There is a certain irony here.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  20. #20
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    She is definitely not a victim. She is a lawyer who accepted a position that was not conveyed to her by the legislature, and thus was subject to a legislative over-ride. The document that identifies the legislature as having the final say in judicial appointments is the Virginia Constitution, the very same foundation document that justices of the Virginia Supreme Court must rule upon. There is a certain irony here.
    But... but... but... Uncle Barry told me that Constitutions don't matter any more!!!

    TFred

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Northern Piedmont-Culpeper
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    She is definitely not a victim. She is a lawyer who accepted a position that was not conveyed to her by the legislature, and thus was subject to a legislative over-ride. The document that identifies the legislature as having the final say in judicial appointments is the Virginia Constitution, the very same foundation document that justices of the Virginia Supreme Court must rule upon. There is a certain irony here.
    With all due respect, our commonwealth government could a rodents derriere about the Virginia Constitution. If either the Governor or the Attorney General chose to follow the Virginia Constitution, they would enforce all the laws and follow all the rules, not just the ones that will get them votes or the ones they agree with. Mark Herring should have been impeached over his refusal to enforce the Marriage laws, a constitutional amendment approved by the citizens of Virginia.
    "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Northern Piedmont-Culpeper
    Posts
    176

    Virginia Senate rejects GOP choice for high court; McAuliffe plans to reappoint his p

    I cannot for the life of me understand why the Governor would insult and show blatant disrespect for the Republicans when they clearly need to compromise on both issues. Why would Republicans want to work with him after he comes out and says these things? It truly reminds me of the way our current President acts sometimes.

    http://www.fredericksburg.com/news/v...c6060bcd0.html
    "Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth." - Mike Tyson

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Did anybody else notice that the Dems adjourned the Special Session yesterday with the Sept 1st deadline for redrawing the 3rd Congressional District lines fast approaching? Their public excuse is that it was "evident" the redrawing of the lines could not be done in time so why waste the taxpayers' money continuing the session.*

    The matter of the VASC appointment has no apparent bearing on the decision.

    stay safe.

    * - when have the Dems ever been concerned about spending the taxpayers' money when that did not involve spending more of it?
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  24. #24
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Did anybody else notice that the Dems adjourned the Special Session yesterday with the Sept 1st deadline for redrawing the 3rd Congressional District lines fast approaching? Their public excuse is that it was "evident" the redrawing of the lines could not be done in time so why waste the taxpayers' money continuing the session.*

    The matter of the VASC appointment has no apparent bearing on the decision.

    stay safe.

    * - when have the Dems ever been concerned about spending the taxpayers' money when that did not involve spending more of it?
    Everyone noticed Skid. Accordingly to Gilbert who's mad enough to eat nails and excrete girders, it was an illegal move. Nothing was accomplished in special session, redistricting is going to the judge and I see war on the horizion.

  25. #25
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Did anybody else notice that the Dems adjourned the Special Session yesterday with the Sept 1st deadline for redrawing the 3rd Congressional District lines fast approaching? Their public excuse is that it was "evident" the redrawing of the lines could not be done in time so why waste the taxpayers' money continuing the session.*

    The matter of the VASC appointment has no apparent bearing on the decision.

    stay safe.

    * - when have the Dems ever been concerned about spending the taxpayers' money when that did not involve spending more of it?
    Yes, and in violation of the Virginia Constitution, not that that matters much to Democrats.

    For those who lack my keen insight (), check on the background of the judges who will now be drawing the boundaries.

    I suspect, as with nearly every other issue that the Democrats can't win at the will of the people, the leadership saw that they could not prevail by following the rules, so they adjourned the session, throwing the task back to the judicial branch, which is not accountable to anyone.

    I would be very surprised if the judges that will be tasked with redrawing the lines are not of the liberal persuasion.

    TFred

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •