Tuesday, March 11, 2014

 
THE US SUPREME COURT AND VILLALOBOS

I know my readers are tired of me discussing Villalobos, and I know a lot of you hate educational posts - but the BV exists under my terms and not to please my readers.  Cow-towing to readers is how you never end up publishing anything important.

I personally believe his best chance for a complete reversal is on the jury misconduct.  I cannot assess his chances because I have not seen the documents.

People seem to think the Supreme Court is about justice - justice is not even a consideration.  There was a time Associate Justice White use to issue a standard dissent when the Court refused to hear a case wherein two appellate courts interpreted the same federal law in two different ways.  The result was, depending on where you lived is how the federal law was applied.  In some states you may have committed a crime, and in others for the same act under the same federal law it was not a crime.

Believe it our not, this is still happening.  You as a citizen are not only expected to know and understand all of the federal laws which judges cannot even agree on, but to know that in certain parts of the US the law means "A" and in other parts of the US the law means "B".  This is what the 9 on the US Supreme Court calls justice.
 
HOW VILLALOBOS GETS HEARD BY THE SUPREMES

The Supreme Court cares not one iota about the individual cases.  They collect data to see where there is consistent problems with a legal issue.  One justice will then convince 3 other justices that it is time to address the issue.  But they do not take the case because of the individual appellant, they take the case so as to provide so called better guidance to the lower courts.  Parties are not even relevant to their decision to take the case.

There is a growing number of cases wherein courts have thrown out jury verdicts because of jury misconduct related to the Internet.  This is a hot issue.  The key to getting a case heard by the US Supreme Court is to turn it into a national discussion.  Once that happens major news organizations start to look at the issue and all of a sudden there is a national discussion.  It is that national discussion which gets the Supreme Court thinking - it is time to address this issue.

Once they decide it is time to address the issue because it has national implications, they then begin to look for the right case.  Not all cases are the same.  They prefer a case which makes for a clear statement as to when a new trial should and should not be granted.

Because I have not reviewed Villalobos' case on this issue I have no way of assessing the merits of the issue.

So now you have your lesson.  You will be tested on Friday - be ready or fail.



No comments: