MOM!

Madam I'm Adam.

Here's another instance:This case works much better with the civil-rights-reminiscent "x delayed is x denied" framework. But again, it is within the judge's purview to stay the decision until the appeals are worked through. And, as it just makes sense to do so, he did.

Who's fucking whom, is hardly the same as releasing criminals from jail.

NPR may have been incorrect - I'm not sure a stay has been granted. There are conflicting reports, apparently.

That right there is the problem

Arizona is within the jurisdictional boundaries of the 9th Circuit of the US District Court. The seat of the 9th Circuit is in San Francisco. Ergo, the judge was in California. It's the only place the action could be heard.

Note - my most recent quote is a different (California) case, not the Arizona one. But your logic applies equally well.

ah, I see.

According to this liveblog, there is a temporary stay, until a hearing can be held on whether to continue the stay.

I was joking. CA - REALLY LIBERAL ... oh nevermind...




Note to self -
< don't forget the smilie>

ah, humor. I think I've heard of it!

The explanation was WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too long.
When that id the case the joke is ruined ... if it was ever funny at all.

Anyway - since we're on the subject ...
I find it interesting that a Bush appointed Judge who is openly gay decided on the case.
Many do not believe that influenced his decision.

You mean that example of an economic Liberal powerhouse? They are doing great aren't they?

I found several political cartoons about the AZ law here, but this one seemed to fit another current thread