A judge can't bump it to the SCOTUS, must make ruling
Posted Oct 10, 2003 9:46 UTC (Fri) by
Duncan (guest, #6647)
In reply to:
A closer look at Sunncomm's lawsuit threat by dve
Parent article:
Student faces suit over key to CD locks (News.com)
> I feel a wise judge would probably bump this one to the Supreme Court
> for reasons of job safety. No district judge would want to call this case
> either way, IMO (caveat: IANAL, nor a judge).
Well, they might /want/ to, but ..
At least as I understand it (IANAL/J either), the gateway to the court system is thru
the trial court, which MUST decide one way or another. They can then stay the
ruling for a period of time, giving the losing side (well, in criminal cases, if the
prosecutor loses, that case is over, tho in priority cases another level may try the
person on different charges, federal on federal crimes if the state failed to convict on
the basis of state law/crimes, or vis versa, so only a trial court guilty verdict can be
appealed, tho from there the appeals either way can be appealed) time to appeal. In
some exceptional cases, appeals courts can pass on it and send it in an expidited
process to the SCOTUS, but often as not the SCOTUS rejects it and sends it back
thru the appeals process. The reason being SCOTUS likes all the appeals history
and trial and appeals arguments organized neatly before them, giving them a chance
if possible to rule on some technicality and send it back down to the bench or
appeals level for resolution based on that. In fact, the court system at every level
looks to rule on technicalities, rather than ruling on the big issues, as they are
otherwise accused of being "activist judges that make law rather than deciding
current law."
Thus, at the low end, the trial court, at least, the judge has NO CHOICE but to rule
one way or the other, tho they WILL usually try to rule on a technicality rather than
the big picture, if at all possible.
Duncan
(
Log in to post comments)
