WE NEED A WIN

[Oakview2]

A sincere prayer that Judge Ochoa rules on the merits of the case, not the rantings of the state and CBD. We need judges to stand up for the Rule of Law. The Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and Federal Preemption has a long history of precedent. Gods Speed PLP!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oakview2]

If he rules against the federal supremacy clause, he will set a precedent that will undo years and years of judgements, I think he knows he cannot overturn so much existing case law, without looking like a stooge, hence his eagerness to get a settlement. Even if we force the preemption on the judge, he will screw us on the regs. JMHO

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[Hefty1]

I believe the important aspect of said judge is he is: "State of Calif" court. Being a State judge he would tend to favor the States position. To deliver a judgment contrary to the State tends to diminish his appointed position....just saying! IMHO

Thus the MSC.....so he doesnt go against the state or brown. But if he goes with the state he will have do all his courses on Legal Ethics all over again.

 

[Clay Diggins]

This isn't about a Judge or how many people show up in a courtroom. It's about the facts and the law.

The miner's lawyers finally expanded their argument to include the laws prohibiting the banning of any particular form of mining. There is your law. You are welcome Jerry.

The State introduced a very important fact at this hearing. It's sad that the Judge had to be the one to elicit their testimony but it's mostly important that it is now on the record.

Judge Ochoa asked attorneys representing the state if they can provide a date that the current moratorium will end. The response was, "No, your honor."

An endless moratorium is no different than a ban in the eyes of the law.

Thank the ICMJ for bringing to light the FACT that was established at that hearing. Without them we wouldn't know that the case was won.

Put the facts and the law together and you have a Judge who is suddenly scrambling to get the State and the miners into a settlement conference. Judges don't insist on settlement conferences, much less personally oversee them, if they are going to make judgement against the the plaintiffs (miners).

They could however feel an obligation to protect their employer (the State) from a devastating loss. Give them a chance to turn their loss into a win in negotiations.

IF Jerry and crew are paying attention they will realize that they are holding the winning hand. It is their game to lose now.

Jerry PLEASE hold their hands to the fire! If you walk out of there with anything less than an end to the moratorium you have failed. If you see that failure coming politely leave the table and let the Judge do what he knows he must.

Sometimes miners are so busy believing that the whole world is against them they wouldn't know a win if it reached up and kissed them!