interesting (supreme Court ruling)

[Briar Rose 7457]

sue foreign governments

 

[wvrevy]

That's a fairly bad precedent, in my opinion....it's not like there's any way to enforce those types of rulings, now is there.

I mean, what would our government do if sued for 100 million dollars in a French court ? Dubya'd hurt himself laughing...

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

but I think the Austrian government has attachable asset in the US, that's what makes the ruling important.

 

[wvrevy]

But that's my point, we're going to now have power over those assets, simply by nature of our court system awarding them to someone else.

Just a bad precedent, IMO.....and one that will likely be turned against us fairly quickly.

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

you don't think that assets within the borders of the US should be subject to attachment to pay a judgment against a foreign country? I'm not talking embassies or consulates, I'm talking about private real estate, investments, etc.

 

[ThreeCircles]

Damn those crazy, liberal, activist Supreme Court Justices once and for all!

Don't they know they're supposed to stay in their courthouse with their mouths shut and out of the way of w and Congress?!?!

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

it does bode well for the other decisions pending before the court, doesn't it?

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by Briar Rose 7457
it does bode well for the other decisions pending before the court, doesn't it?

How so?

 

[Briar Rose 7457]

it was a 6-3 decision, with two of the conservative voting with the majority. if this is the pattern for the next decisions...