Delay attempted to be declared ineligible under the US constitution in order to get around the Texas election law.
I thought this sounded really strange before I went and actually read the Texas election law. After I read it, I don't see how Delay can win this. Like it or not, he is the Republican nominee at this point, and he can't be replaced.
New Jersey's election laws are likely different, or possibly the situation was different as well. I'm really not sure what situation you're referring to in regards to NJ.
NJ Jersey Law did not allow Torecella to be set aside in 2002 that close to the election. The NJ Supreme Court simply ignored the law and wrote a new law to suit their political baises.
"New Jersey's election laws are likely different, or possibly the situation was different as well. "
New Jersey law was crystal clear - the replacement of Torricelli violated the election law, the deadline for replacing a candidate had long-since passed. It was far more drastic than this case, since it was in October, and here we are talking about June when the decision was finalized.
What was different was that it was deemed a higher calling to have the 'right' candidates in an election, by the NJ kangaroo justices. That interest overrode the meaningless deadlines and election-law specfics.
In this case, the judge has *forbidden* the GOP to state that DeLay is 'ineligible to serve'... Well, the only problem with that is ... that Delay *is* in fact 'ineligible to serve'. He just voted in the Virginia primary and is a Virginia legal resident at this point.
"Sparks barred Texas GOP chairwoman Tina Benkiser from “certifying to the Texas Secretary of State any candidate other than Tom DeLay to appear on the ballot in the 2006 general election as the Republican nominee for the United States House of Representatives from Texas District 22.”"
YET SPARKS ADMIST DELAY MAY ACTUALLY *BE* INELIGIBLE! ...
""There is evidence DeLay is not going to be eligible to be elected to the United States House of Representatives in the upcoming general election,” Sparks wrote in his order. "DeLay himself testified that he does not know what will happen in his life in November, stating only that he plans to live in Virginia ‘indefinitely.’”
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/14979384.htm
Sparks is handing the Democrats an election on a silver platter. Likely, Sparks will rule - After the GOP votes vote for DeLay anyway - that since DeLay cant serve, Lampson wins ... or some such nonsense.
Like I said, Dems and Repubs are subject to different standards.
What's also interesting is that in both the Carnahan case and Torricelli case, we are talking about the Senate. DeLay is House, and so was Patsy Mink. Mink died a week after the Hawaii primary and the Democrats demanded that she be kept on the ballot anyway for name recognition. She won posthumously.
-PJ
"I thought this sounded really strange before I went and actually read the Texas election law."
Have a link handy?
New Jersey law had nothing to do with the Torch stepping aside for the Cadaver. The highest court of New Jersey ignored the law because they wanted a Democrat to win.