Do you feel that the Supreme Court would have heard the Padilla appeal if they weren't in Bush's pocket?

Excuse me, I think you spell that SUPREME COUP...

and, the answer to your question is YES. But don't forget: The weenie Democrats in Congress have helped to deliver the vast majority of the sick sick sick Bu$h agenda for the last 5+ years, including passing his poor nominees right onto the bench.

Actually, if you research the Supreme Court, you will see that they are not in anyone's pocket. If they were under the control of President Bush, many decisions would have been overturned. It's funny how everyone blames the President for things he couldn't possibly have control over. I think that the Justices can allow their own personal bias to enter into cases, and that is unfortunate. I am not familiar with the Padilla case, but generally the SC tries to stay away from the really big issues that noone wants to decide on, at least the first one or two times they come around. Remember Terry Schiavo?

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court's role in intercession is exhibited only in cases where a judgement for relief is available Since Padilla has been charged, he no longer qualifies, as he's recieved that relief.

The fact that the court hasa stated that it will be keeping it's eye on the proceedings does imply that they believe previously he was due judgement for relief, and seems to indicate that if thee are other irregularities, they would take action.

I think they wanted to stay out of this sticky situation, personally, so they decided to let it slide for now. The criminal case is going to make its way back up there anyway, I think they're waiting for a better political climate if they decide to go against Bush.

If they were in Bush's pocket, we would have Roe v. Wade and Employment Div. v. Smith overturned already.

What do you mean by that you know people who like bush would get mad not that i'm sayin i like him or nothng