|
|
|
 |
Donate Here By Secure Server
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! Thanks Registered |
|
Posted on 07/14/2003 5:03:52 PM PDT by churchillbuff
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
U.S. District Judge Philip Pro temporarily restrained the action by which the Nevada Assembly passed a tax bill with less than a two-thirds vote. He ordered an en banc hearing with all district judges for 9 a.m. Wednesday in Reno and Las Vegas.
The Assembly voted 26-16 Sunday for a bill that would increase taxes by a record $788 million over the next two years.
Today, Republican lawmakers, citizens and business groups -- upset with Thursday's decision by the state Supreme Court rejecting the two-thirds vote requirement to pass taxes -- filed an action in U.S. District Court seeking to block the court's ruling.
Assembly Minority Leader Lynn Hettrick, R-Gardnerville, said the federal action is necessary because the 6-1 Supreme Court ruling allowing only a simple majority to raise taxes is unconstitutional.
"We don't believe the court's decision that we can ignore the constitution is legal," he said.
|
|
|
|
|
Donate Here By Secure Server
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! Thanks Registered |
|
The Supreme Court of Nevada -- a bunch of liberals -- last week ordered the Legislature to ignore the 2/3 requirement and pass a tax increase by a simple majority vote. This, even thought the 2/3 requirement is part of the state constitution (put there through a voter initiative in the early 90s)
The Supreme Court of Nevada -- a bunch of liberals -- last week ordered the Legislature to ignore the 2/3 requirement and pass a tax increase by a simple majority vote. This, even thought the 2/3 requirement is part of the state constitution (put there through a voter initiative in the early 90s)
The Supreme Court of Nevada -- a bunch of liberals -- last week ordered the Legislature to ignore the 2/3 requirement and pass a tax increase by a simple majority vote. This, even thought the 2/3 requirement is part of the state constitution (put there through a voter initiative in the early 90s)
That's what we Nevadan's are asking, oh naive one, because it took 2 separate votes of the public to put the 2/3's requirement in the state Constitution. Can you spell "Democrats" on the state supreme court? Can you spell "teachers unions"? Can you spell "Rino Governor"? Well, you better pray to God that we take care of this little problem, because if we don't any law in the US can be overturned.
They just DID IT. The SCONEV literally issued an opinion saying "the right to a well-funded public educational system [a 'right' the liberal SCONEV justices made up out of thin air] outweighs the right of the people to choose what their state constitution says. We hereby order the Legislature to 'show us the money!'" They, of course, have absolutely no authority to say the Constitution itself is invalid (which they did anyway) or to make law from the bench (which they did anyway). I'm not the least bit surprised a federal judge but the brakes on this. He'll almost certainly rule in the end, "The hell you will, Nevada." The SCONEV will get a well-deserved federal smackdown just as the oh-so-appropriately-naked SCOFLA did in the 2000 election.
Same answer as always: They're liberals.
I'm now searching the nevada constitution for this provision. Above in a post, someone said it was added by voter initiative in the 90's. I'll look around and try to paste relative section(s)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.