Because you won't actually save money going a la carte? It will only mean that pretty much all channels will be more expensive since there will be smaller group of people purchasing them and the fees for carrying the channel for the cable operator won't go down.
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
Read the last sentence a couple of times until it sinks in. And, no, the Supreme Court has never expanded its original jurisdiction. You just made that up.
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
This isn't a dispute between states nor does it involve ambassadors, etc. so it falls under the apellate jurisdiction which is subject to Congress' regulation. This is fromArticle 3 section 2.
Yes they do. The inferior courts were created and vested with power by Congress. The Supreme Court also has no original jurisdiction n this matter and per Article 3 section 2 Congress can restrict the Supreme Courts apellate jurisdiction. Have you people even read the Constitution?
Pass a law that limits the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction per their powers granted via Article 3 section 2. They've used this power previously such as during Reconstruction.
No, it doesn't. Read article 3 Section 2 which explicitly states their original jurisdiction and how their appellate jurisdiction is subject to regulation by Congress.
Hahaha you're so wrong it's not even funny. I suggest you look up 'jurisdiction stripping' and read the Exceptions clause of the Constitution (article 3 section 2).
Sure, but who's going to stop them? Not the Executive branch and the Supreme Court has no original jurisdiction in the matter so if it wanted to Congress can stop the courts from even hearing the cases.
Sure that is until Congress uses their powers to limit the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction to even hear the case since this would not fall under the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction.
Well, at one point in the past there was Maemo whose apps generally didn't spy on you, and you had root access out of the box, and it was ahead of iOS on everything from cut and paste to multitasking.
"Maemo" is not a company and it was produced by Nokia which is, you guessed it, a company that makes billions of dollars a year.
You're joking, right? Last fiscal year they had net income of $23 billion and the previous quarter they made they made about $21 billion in revenue and net income of $6.6 billion.
People keep the packaging for returns and because selling your mint condition iDevice with mint condition packaging means you get higher resell value on eBay.
Slashdot Mirror
Because you won't actually save money going a la carte? It will only mean that pretty much all channels will be more expensive since there will be smaller group of people purchasing them and the fees for carrying the channel for the cable operator won't go down.
Sure for a couple percent of people. Most people still get cable. You need to expand your sampling size beyond Slashdot and other nerd circles.
People also lie.
3DLABS not Intel developed the Permedia graphics cards.
So there are 300 days in a month now?
Gartner is a whore to anyone that pays it.
How dare you! Making 'Magic Quadrants' is vital to the continued existence of the human race!
You don't need to download them from anywhere. They are in the mainline kernel.
How is using a Constitutional power unlawful?
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
Read the last sentence a couple of times until it sinks in. And, no, the Supreme Court has never expanded its original jurisdiction. You just made that up.
He can't because the Consitution actually says:
In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.
This isn't a dispute between states nor does it involve ambassadors, etc. so it falls under the apellate jurisdiction which is subject to Congress' regulation. This is fromArticle 3 section 2.
Yes they do. The inferior courts were created and vested with power by Congress. The Supreme Court also has no original jurisdiction n this matter and per Article 3 section 2 Congress can restrict the Supreme Courts apellate jurisdiction. Have you people even read the Constitution?
Pass a law that limits the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction per their powers granted via Article 3 section 2. They've used this power previously such as during Reconstruction.
No, it doesn't. Read article 3 Section 2 which explicitly states their original jurisdiction and how their appellate jurisdiction is subject to regulation by Congress.
Bill of Rights issues aren't part of its original jurisdiction. You've just made something up that has no Constitutional basis.
Hahaha you're so wrong it's not even funny. I suggest you look up 'jurisdiction stripping' and read the Exceptions clause of the Constitution (article 3 section 2).
Sure, but who's going to stop them? Not the Executive branch and the Supreme Court has no original jurisdiction in the matter so if it wanted to Congress can stop the courts from even hearing the cases.
Sure that is until Congress uses their powers to limit the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction to even hear the case since this would not fall under the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction.
The NSL provisions were created by Congress. And Congress has the Constitutional authority to tell the courts to take a hike.
Well, at one point in the past there was Maemo whose apps generally didn't spy on you, and you had root access out of the box, and it was ahead of iOS on everything from cut and paste to multitasking.
"Maemo" is not a company and it was produced by Nokia which is, you guessed it, a company that makes billions of dollars a year.
Uh huh. Except that if you take out the writedown their quarter was pretty close to the previous one in which they had $6.6 billion in net income.
You're joking, right? Last fiscal year they had net income of $23 billion and the previous quarter they made they made about $21 billion in revenue and net income of $6.6 billion.
Yes, because Google didn't do a $6.2 billion writedown like Microsoft did.
Being buggy is a 'mnor fault', now?
People keep the packaging for returns and because selling your mint condition iDevice with mint condition packaging means you get higher resell value on eBay.
Such as wondrous Slashdot which still sucks at Unicode...