Comments on: The Case That May Require DeLay To Stay On The Ballot http://capitolannex.com/2006/07/10/the-case-that-may-require-delay-to-stay-on-the-ballot/ Outside Austin, But Terribly Well Connected Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:55:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Capitol Annex » Nominated For Recognition By The ‘Watcher’s Council’ http://capitolannex.com/2006/07/10/the-case-that-may-require-delay-to-stay-on-the-ballot/comment-page-1/#comment-8611 Capitol Annex » Nominated For Recognition By The ‘Watcher’s Council’ Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:06:26 +0000 http://capitolannex.com/2006/07/10/the-case-that-may-require-delay-to-stay-on-the-ballot/#comment-8611 [...] Last week, my post entitled “The Case That May Require DeLay To Stay On The Ballot,” was nominated by the Watcher’s Council as one of the most link-worthy pieces of writing in the Blogsphere. [...] [...] Last week, my post entitled “The Case That May Require DeLay To Stay On The Ballot,” was nominated by the Watcher’s Council as one of the most link-worthy pieces of writing in the Blogsphere. [...]

]]> By: Rhymes With Right http://capitolannex.com/2006/07/10/the-case-that-may-require-delay-to-stay-on-the-ballot/comment-page-1/#comment-8251 Rhymes With Right Thu, 13 Jul 2006 03:51:24 +0000 http://capitolannex.com/2006/07/10/the-case-that-may-require-delay-to-stay-on-the-ballot/#comment-8251 By the way -- I liked this post. I put it up for consideration over here. http://www.watcherofweasels.com/archives/001937.html By the way — I liked this post. I put it up for consideration over here.

http://www.watcherofweasels.com/archives/001937.html

]]> By: Capitol Annex » RPT’s Grounds For Appeal Of DeLay Case http://capitolannex.com/2006/07/10/the-case-that-may-require-delay-to-stay-on-the-ballot/comment-page-1/#comment-8105 Capitol Annex » RPT’s Grounds For Appeal Of DeLay Case Tue, 11 Jul 2006 20:21:35 +0000 http://capitolannex.com/2006/07/10/the-case-that-may-require-delay-to-stay-on-the-ballot/#comment-8105 [...] What Bopp and Burka both miss, though, is that cases like Schaeffer v. Townsend, as I noted before, have held that qualifications clause set forth in the Constitution is all-encompassing, and that no state law may superceed that. [...] [...] What Bopp and Burka both miss, though, is that cases like Schaeffer v. Townsend, as I noted before, have held that qualifications clause set forth in the Constitution is all-encompassing, and that no state law may superceed that. [...]

]]>