I think SCOTUS can only consider the documents of the case and oral arguments pertaining to the appeal and it's constitutionality. If this evidence was not admitted in the earlier trail it can't be added upon appeal. That said. I was rejected by Dan Quayle's law school Alma mater upon my 1st attempt in 1978 with a nice letter giving me hope for the future I never got back to after library school and la languishing addiction to multifarious vices.
I kind of wondered if these videos would be admissible evidence or whatever the proper term is in a Supreme Court decision, or just ancillary substantiation that, having fallen on Justice Kennedy's ears, can't help but sway him when the time comes.
I think SCOTUS can only consider the documents of the case and oral arguments pertaining to the appeal and it's constitutionality. If this evidence was not admitted in the earlier trail it can't be added upon appeal. That said. I was rejected by Dan Quayle's law school Alma mater upon my 1st attempt in 1978 with a nice letter giving me hope for the future I never got back to after library school and la languishing addiction to multifarious vices.
ReplyDeleteI kind of wondered if these videos would be admissible evidence or whatever the proper term is in a Supreme Court decision, or just ancillary substantiation that, having fallen on Justice Kennedy's ears, can't help but sway him when the time comes.
ReplyDelete