Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
I think you are now going to ridiculous extremes to defend your opinion. In particular, I find that your pronouncements on the law are often ill-informed and bizarre, this being no exception.
The Appeal Court decision contained the following under the heading "Standard of Review".
You may also find this excerpt from the Appeal Courts decision interesting.
SCOTUS declined to grant certiorari (ie; to hear the case). As is customary, they did not give reasons. Though you were apparently privy to what took place in chambers, since you equivocally state such reasons. Also, if the judges were, as you say, "in a 4-4 ideological dead lock", cert would have been granted by 4 of your hypothetical pro-Apple justices. It only takes 4 justices to have the Court grant Cert and hear the case. Though a 4-4 deadlock would be interesting, since there are only 7 justices on the panel deciding Cert Applications. Since the Court declined, we must conclude that there were not 4 judges on the Cert panel in favour. In case you are interested, a good summary of SCOTUS procedure can be found here.
I find your "Apples and Oranges" paragraph irrelevant. It seems to simply avoid the point, that is, that the Big 5 are steadily losing ebook market share. |
Perhaps if you research the US legal system a bit, you wouldn't find it quite as bizarre. I suspect you never bothered to read the book that I mentioned a month or two ago. If not, you should. You might actually learn something with regards to how the US legal system works and judicial philosophies within it.
Here is an article on what factors the Supreme Court justices look at before deciding to hear a case on not.
http://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-...ar-a-case.html
https://www.economist.com/blogs/econ...st-explains-19
As it mentions, Rule 10 in the Supreme Court official rule book states that a case is rarely heard if the asserted error has to do with factual findings, that is to say that the case was wrongly decided.
There use to be an interesting series of interviews with the various supreme court justices on the US version of audible. One of the interviews was an hour long interview with Scalia with Charlie Rose. In it he talked about his view of the purpose of Supreme Court and what sort of cases they took. There were also some pretty interesting interviews with Justice Thomas as well.
Scalia gave a lot of interviews over the years in part because he apparently felt that the Supreme Court needed to educate the public on the workings of the Supreme Court. Thomas mentioned that in an interview that he did a few weeks ago. People have a lot of misunderstands of how the Supreme Court works.
By the way, you misunderstand the 7 justices in the Cert panel. That's the judges who are in the Cert pool. They use the cert pool as a labor saving device. Alito and Roberts do not participate in the Cert Pool. They have their clerks read the petitions on their own. All 9 judges (8 at that time) actually vote on granting cert.