U.S. Loses Ruling on Gray Wolves

[MattK]

TB- So a judge should not go by the law? Is this what your life learning has taught you?

 

[Ten Bears]

Nice twist there boy. Most laws (or legal processes) allow for a measure of DISCRETION (should I look up the definition for you). Through that discretion the judge is given the ability to weigh all the pertaining evidense. Can you follow that, or do we need to go back further?

 

[MattK]

TB- most laws are written quite concise and pertain directly with the issue at hand. Interpretations are made by courts, true. I have read bills that have come before the legislature. They are almost too technical. The discretion is not in the judgment, it usually is in what to prosecute the person on (done by prosecuting attorney) and in the sentencing phase. A judge really can not say "yes" when the law says "no". There may be some cases that they can create differing interpretations.

 

[Ten Bears]

MATTy, the ESA isn't a "criminal court" document. It is a legal guideline.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Ten, I bet you've never read the ESA, even though it's been posted here in it's entirety. It's unambiguous. I believe Judge Jones interpreted the law correctly and the FWS has to figure out a better way of dealing with the wolf problem while staying within the law. I, as long as anyone here, have been saying the only way to deal with wolves is to abide by the ESA, get them delisted and control them by hunting. My position has been clear since my first post on the wolf topics. You, BHR and a few other idiots have never understood the wolf issue and probably never will.

The main impediment is still the WY Legislature.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Nice twist there boy. Most laws (or legal processes) allow for a measure of DISCRETION (should I look up the definition for you). Through that discretion the judge is given the ability to weigh all the pertaining evidense. Can you follow that, or do we need to go back further?

Ten Beers,
Isn't that what you whine about being "Activist"????

Just think, in 8 more years you will be in 9th grade, then you can study Civics and understand this thread....

 

[JoseCuervo]

MTMiller,
Don't hold your breath thinking ElkCheese is going to explain his answer. He gets overwhelmed by the need to see his own typing, so he feels compelled to post.

Oh, but they are!!!!
When the wolf was first coming into light, why was it that this whole thing was run thru California, New York, and Washington DC, and not brought before those in the areas that would actually be affected?

ElkCheese,
Can you explain how a Federal Law would be interperted differently in Montana than in NY? How could that be? Do you even understand how the Federal Court system works?

 

[Delw]

Elkgunner,
You need a time out again |oo ,

 

[JoseCuervo]

But Del, it gets boring without me.....

 

[Tuffbucker]

Elk GUmmer,

You being the "brilliant" legal mind that you are....why don't you enlighten us all on exactly how the Federal Court System works........

You asked how the Federal Law would be interpreted in different parts of the country......well the answer is simply...IT JUST DOES!! WHy do you think there is so much contridictory case law in our court system today. Now Im not specifically talking about this case with the wolves, but in the federal court system, there are judges handing down rulings on search and seizure, drug indictments, firearm violations....that are condrictory to what another federal judge in a different part of the country has handed down.....believe me, I'm dealing with it right now concerning a Federal Drug investigation that I helped investigate. Unfortunately, Judges all over the country have their own "interpretations" of what the "exact letter of the law" is saying. Although it shouldn't happen. judges personal opinions and biases sometimes sneak their way into the court room and into judges decisions.....im not saying its right, but it happens. To think that all FEDERAL judges throughout the country will rule the same on the same topics, is assanine. If you think that, then you are dumber than I thought you were. Heck, even with Federal Sentencing Guidelines, I've seen judges firsthand give sentences that were more/less that what the sentencing guidlines stipulated. There will never be an exactitude in our court systems.....

As far as the wolves are concerned, I really dont care one way or the other, but for you to sit here and insult ElkChaser for thinking that a different ruling may have occurred if a different judge had heard the case, let me just tell you that your'e wrong. It very well couldve happened.....and does happen everyday!!

TUFF

TUFF

 

[JoseCuervo]

Tuff,

Different judges will rule differently all the time, but the Law is the same, independent of Geography. That is one of the ridiculous parts of the argument to split up the 9th Circuit. Federal Law in Montana should be the same as Federal Law in San Francisco, don't you agree?

And in any event, the appeals all head to the same address back East. Or would you lead Elkcheese to believe that the Republic of Montana has a different Supreme Court?

 

[ELKCHSR]

Well said Tuffbucker...
I see the only thing on gunners mind, and it continually shows, is trying to get me to wade thru mass amounts of stuff, to try and hit on every little detail of a topic. Sorry gunner, won't happen... Not worth the time.
I think most of the time, the 'KISS' method is the best. Less lawyers would be employed if this were employed more often. There just wouldn't be as many lines to read between and loop holes formed. I think that is why gunner has such a hard time understanding statements made in the SI section sometimes.

 

[Ten Bears]

Ten, I bet you've never read the ESA, even though it's been posted here in it's entirety. It's unambiguous. I believe Judge Jones interpreted the law correctly and the FWS has to figure out a better way of dealing with the wolf problem while staying within the law. I, as long as anyone here, have been saying the only way to deal with wolves is to abide by the ESA, get them delisted and control them by hunting. My position has been clear since my first post on the wolf topics. You, BHR and a few other idiots have never understood the wolf issue and probably never will.

The main impediment is still the WY Legislature.

IT, I have read the ESA, and I understand it. Also I don't think the WY legislature had much to do with this ruling as those wolves are part of the experimental population, and a freind of mine with the f&g assured me that the experimental population was not effected by the ruling of delisting proceedures (call the f&g yourself, you claim to have contacts).

EG, an activist judge is one that continually rules in one direction, despite the fact that the scientific, social, or legal evidense portrays another. EG, please feel free to assure the rest of us that all judges rule the same way all the time, or even that all judges follow all the legal guidelines to the letter. Otherwise, explain that they do have a level of descretion to work with.

 

[Ithaca 37]

Thanks, Ten, for explaining to us that Judge Jones isn't an activist judge. I guess that means everyone has to approve of his ruling on the wolf issue. Right?

 

[JoseCuervo]

Hey ElkCheese,

How come you never answered MTMiller's questions? Is it perhaps you didn't have a clue how to answer, as you don't even know what YOUR thought was?

How far is the drive from Anaconda to Missoula? I think you might be able to find a clue in Missoula.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Also, what does a "wolf coming into light" mean? Reintroductions, ESA,...???

I will answer this as a Yes...
As for any thing else I will answer for you dear gunner, you answer the age old questions I have put before you first, or I don't owe you really much of any thing now do I...

 

[Ten Bears]

Thanks, Ten, for explaining to us that Judge Jones isn't an activist judge. I guess that means everyone has to approve of his ruling on the wolf issue. Right?

No, and it also means that if the same case was presented before a different judge that there may havebeen a different ruling.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Just as I thought!!!!