Message from @zola

Discord ID: 786134292588920864


2020-12-09 07:28:43 UTC  

you will never find in SCOTUS some sort of first instance trial on evidence, etc...

2020-12-09 07:28:44 UTC  

Most aren't state v state

2020-12-09 07:29:05 UTC  

This is the rate instance

2020-12-09 07:29:12 UTC  

Rare

2020-12-09 07:29:40 UTC  

The second link is super in depth

2020-12-09 07:29:46 UTC  

ill check it out

2020-12-09 07:33:45 UTC  

@zola here

2020-12-09 07:34:02 UTC  

```In the late twentieth century, the Supreme Court further limited its original docket by declaring that it would exercise discretion over whether to hear cases even if they were legitimately within the Court's jurisdiction. In a series of cases in 1971, including Ohio v. Wyandotte Chemicals Corp ., the Court declined to hear environmental pollution claims brought by states against corporations that dealt with complex and technical factual questions. The justices ruled that the states had other available forums to bring their claims and that the cases were not "appropriate" for the Court in light of its primary function as the nation's highest appellate tribunal. The Court resolved to examine the "seriousness and dignity" of claims so as to preserve its resources for consideration of appeals involving federal questions. The Supreme Court soon expanded its appropriateness doctrine to decline to hear some cases between two states, even where the Court's jurisdiction was exclusive.```

2020-12-09 07:34:12 UTC  

they dont need to take it

2020-12-09 07:34:25 UTC  

they can send it right back down to the lower courts

2020-12-09 07:34:30 UTC  

even if it involves 2 states

2020-12-09 07:35:27 UTC  

The exception to that is sTate v tate

2020-12-09 07:35:42 UTC  

That's company v state

2020-12-09 07:35:52 UTC  

did you read the entire thing?

2020-12-09 07:36:09 UTC  

Yes why would you assume I didnt

2020-12-09 07:36:10 UTC  

its up to SCOTUS to decide if they want to take it or not, "appropriateness doctrine"

2020-12-09 07:36:17 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/778884457925967883/786134107918827530/image0.png

2020-12-09 07:36:34 UTC  

"decline to hear some cases between two states, even where the Court's jurisdiction was exclusive"

2020-12-09 07:36:36 UTC  

State v state is always original jurisdiction

2020-12-09 07:36:41 UTC  

..

2020-12-09 07:37:01 UTC  

That was regarding the chemical company vs the states

2020-12-09 07:37:07 UTC  

Not states vs states

2020-12-09 07:37:15 UTC  

bro

2020-12-09 07:37:32 UTC  

youre not understanding at all

2020-12-09 07:37:39 UTC  

The irony

2020-12-09 07:37:41 UTC  

I knew you weren’t conservative

2020-12-09 07:37:52 UTC  

yes it is irony

2020-12-09 07:37:56 UTC  

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/778884457925967883/786134521418481674/1602959480763.jpg

2020-12-09 07:38:03 UTC  

Bruh wtf

2020-12-09 07:38:14 UTC  

it doesnt matter if its 1 state or 2 state, its under SCOTUS jurisdiction, BUT they DONT have to take it

2020-12-09 07:38:16 UTC  

they dont give a shit

2020-12-09 07:38:18 UTC  

LMAO the guy in the back

2020-12-09 07:38:22 UTC  

if thy dont want it, they wont take it

2020-12-09 07:38:23 UTC  

its that simple

2020-12-09 07:38:32 UTC  

i dont understand the confusing here

2020-12-09 07:38:39 UTC  

The last imagoi sent uses the article you cited as an example

2020-12-09 07:38:53 UTC  

I encourage you to read it

2020-12-09 07:39:06 UTC  

Rate my setup guys

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/778884457925967883/786134816461946900/1607401098712.jpg

2020-12-09 07:39:17 UTC  

???

2020-12-09 07:39:25 UTC  

you cant be forreal lol

2020-12-09 07:39:29 UTC  

do you even understand how the process works