Posted on 06/04/2009 2:24:13 PM PDT by steve-b
South Carolina's Supreme Court ordered Gov. Mark Sanford on Thursday to take $700 million in federal stimulus money aimed primarily at struggling schools.
The decision brings a likely end to months of wrangling between the nation's most vocal anti-bailout governor and legislators who accused him of playing politics with people's lives.
The Republican governor had refused to take the money designated for the state over the next two years, facing down irate protesters and legislators who passed a budget requiring him to do so. While other Republican governors had taken issue with requesting money from the $787 billion federal stimulus package, Sanford was the first governor to defend in court his desire to reject money from Washington....
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
Judges (and, therefore, lawyers) are frightening creatures.
It does me, but I have not kept up with this case enough to know on what grounds the challenge was on.
It sure does. My first thought.
That the judicial branch can order the exec to do something is fine and dandy, its a constitutional check. That a State Supreme court would order the cession of state sovereignty in south Carolina is very *very* profound..
This money came with strings binding the people of South Carolin and I hope the appreciate the chains Washington is forgin the next time taxes have to be raised to sustain this annual new spending..
I really wonder how long any of us can continue to obey the “law”. It is no longer law, but rule of oligarchy and their thugs. Sanford should either refuse (and force the issue) or resign under protest (the “nice” option).
Yes, and the executive branch (Pres. Zero) is ordering the legislative branch (Congress-stimulus) around as well.
Rock paper scissors just became smash cut tear and is useless.
As another executive once said, "They have given their order. Let's see them try and enforce it." --or words to that effect.
In 1832 when told how to handle the Cherokees by the John Marshall’s supreme court, Andrew Jackson is supposed to have said “Mr Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!” and refused to follow the court’s direction. In fact he didnt say that, but he also didnt follow the court’s direction, saying with a bit less drama “The decision of the Supreme court has fell still born, and they find that it cannot coerce Georgia to yield to its mandate.” In the end, the executive did not take orders from the judicial, as it should be. And so it should be in this case.
It seems to me I remember something about seperation of powers...Who ever is in charge should tell the courts to pi$$ up a rope.
Is that poor reporting or poor adjudicating? The question shouldn't be "what did congress intend", but "what did the constitution intend".
And this decision is not?
Really? Quote the relevant portion(s) of the Constitution, please.
“That the judicial branch can order the exec to do something is fine and dandy, its a constitutional check.”
I thought something like this was the point of checks and balances. It would have been different had the state legislature voted on it. This was basically legislation from the bench. Not so good.
Perhaps in a case of state law but to force the chief executive of the state to accept federal funding? I don't see it.
How would they enforce it?
I hope Gov Sanford keeps his cool and continues to refuse the money. OR if he has no other recourse, he can take the money and put it in a secure bank and then after a year (or less) pay it back to the US Treasury.
They said he had to take it, not that he had to use it, right?
The court is overstepping its bounds there, is it not?
“...who accused him of playing politics with people’s lives.”
Who’s lives would they be referring to?
(forced STATE Welfare)
And the court isn't?
I am so sick of the double standard that the liberals use.
Now we will see if Sanford has the guts to say, “Thank you, co-equal branch of the government, for your ruling but I happen to disgaree and therefore will not accept the stimulus money.” Does Sanford have any guts? More guts than, say, Jeb Bush?
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.