Posted on 03/19/2011 6:20:22 AM PDT by BillKneer
nce again the left shows us that “We the People” and the rule of law mean nothing. The socialist County Court Judge Maryann Sumi is doing what the left-wing judicial branch does best; circumventing the will of the people by legislating from the bench.
Politico reported that Judge Maryann Sumi temporarily halted Wisconsin’s union law.Dane County Court Judge Maryann Sumi issued the order — which prevents Wisconsin Secretary of State Doug LaFollette from publishing the collective bargaining law until she could rule on the case — in response to a complaint brought by the county district attorney on behalf of several public officials who claim Republicans violated the state’s open-meeting law by pushing the legislation through unlawfully.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotstatesman.com ...
Look. It’ the role of the court to determine if any law passed by the government (no matter how overwhelmingly popular) is constitutional. We all get that.
With that said, the ruling by this Wisconsin Judge is just pure intellectual sloth at best or party politics at worse. If it’s the latter, the woman should be removed from her position. Judges are not supposed to respond to the politics of the issue.
True, by rule (not by law...by rule) if the Senate was in normal session a certain amount of time must be given before any vote can occur. However, the rules do not apply when the Senate is in ‘Special Session’ and the Senate was in Special session. Therefore, no time was needed to call for debate and vote. I’ve read over this at least ten times now. It’s more clear than Wisconsin is cold.
I understand the Dems are frustrated with the new collective bargaining laws in Wisconsin. I even respect their spirited opposition to it. Still, on some level don’t they know that sometimes the other side gets to win day? And, that’s all that has happened this time....Walker and the GOP won the day....for now.
As a winners in this scrum, we GOPers certainly don’t insist that we also get to win over their hearts and minds, too. But, we absolutely do insist they lose with graciousness, class, and dignity...all of which they seem to be incapable of displaying.
In any case, this is a democracy. The next election is just around the corner....always. Grow up, Democrats!!
How can a county judge’s ruling have jurisdiction over an entire state?
Though your point is well taken, you are not exactly correct.
Our leaders are indeed elected through a democratic process. Once that occurs, we have no say over the decisions they make because they simply ‘represent us’ as you rightfully point out.
Still, elections are truly a democratic process and the 2012 election will be where this particular issue (since it’s grown so big) will likely be resolved......for the foreseeable.
Ughhh!!! Actually, assuming Walker doesn’t get recalled, it won’t truly be resolved until 2014 because he has veto power. I will be shocked if the GOP hold onto the House and Senate in 2012. It’s not because I don’t want them to hold on, it’s just that the GOP never wins elections in Wisconsin. I’m surprised they are in control, now.
I was trying to point out the blogger's errors. The "people" did not enact the law - the WI legislature did.
The judge made an injunction before actually looking at the complaint from what I can tell. She not only is in cahoots with the rep but she's clearly legislating from the bench. She should be impeached.
Right, but can they change the rules without a quorum? I would not like to see the WI legislature simply make up rules every day to accommodate their daily needs. Would you?
Same in Florida. Although the people are getting wise. Last election there was a big push to vote "no" forretention of three FL Supreme Court judges.
As far as Wisconson, the Repubs in the state house and senate should move immediately to impeach and remove that, er, judge. Then maybe the activists judges just might pause before they legislate from the bench.
The Republican majority will prevail here in a revote if necessary.
The liberal process for wearing down your opponent and get your way:
First, call the concept racist, sexist, or some other “ist”.
Second, if that does not work, start screaming “Do it for the children!!” or “It will hurt the middle class!”.
Third, if that does not work, just call it “unconstitutional” since liberals interpret anything they do not like as “unconstitutional” regardless of whether it is or not.
That pretty much sums it up. Did I miss any liberal orthodoxy steps?
JoMa
I was thinking the exact same thing when I read that... even though that's a misleading title. This is an argument about procedure, not the law itself... not saying the tards won't use any means necessary to fulfill the underlying agenda, of course.
The group of guys who founded this country knew of the dangers of "majority rules" mentality. That is why we not only have a representative democracy, but also a constitution and bill of rights to protect the individual FROM that representative democracy. It's a pretty clever and effective layout, but all too often ignored by the courts.
Good strategy!
Does this ‘’judge’’ have any kida or grandkids and other family members she can ‘’donate’’,,,,without their knowledge or permission of course. These people are crap,, how bout a National Crap on Your Kid day??
Thank you! Most people do not know that we, the United States, have a representative republic form of government.
To the liberals, the courts are supposed to be a super veto against conservative/Republican legislation which, in the view of liberals, goes too far.
The relevant laws, or legal precedents, mean nothing to the liberals. Liberals want judges to impose same-sex marriage, impose and endorse draconian EPA rules, overturn state immigration laws even if the language mirrors federal immigration law, impose requirements for multi-lingualism, overturn laws which define and restrain union bargaining rights, etc.
If the liberals had their way, there would be no legislation and no need for elected representatives. In their utopia, judges would decide everything.
The liberals want judges to make policy choices and enshrine those into legal precedent, based on ruling that a legislature or executive acted unconstitutionally in enacting certain legislation or policies. And that’s where the liberals are all wrong. Judges are not supposed to make policy choices. Judges are supposed to administer law, not make policy choices.
The thing that is not so clear is that the meeting in question was a joint committee meeting, not just a Senate committee meeting. It’s not entirely clear, then, that the Senate rule controls here, if it does not, then the meeting very likely did violate the open meetings law.
Regardless of the merits of the decision, it ought to be moot. The Republicans sould poat notice 24 hours in advance, vote again, and end this. They probably should have done so in the first place.
Kneel before the queen you filthy, uneducated rabble!
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.