This is judicial interference in an election. Isn’t the lawful remedy - via the election financial disclosure laws - already established as a fine, and not the nullification of an election. Seems with the Dims having no candidate the judge is trying to pevent the GOP guy from running unopposed. Where does the law say a candidate cannot run unopposed?
In this guys courtroom, thats where.
I’ll bet a lot of liberals across the country, salivating over this decision. A new way to nullify elections they lost.
Robert Torricelli
He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996, defeating Republican Congressman Dick Zimmer to obtain the seat vacated by the retirement of Democratic Senator Bill Bradley. It was later found that six donors had made illegal contributions to Torricelli's campaign. In 2000, he headed the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee which regained the Democratic majority in the Senate. Torricelli was responsible for recruiting Senate candidates including Hillary Clinton.
Late in the 2002 Senate election against Republican Doug Forrester, Torricelli received a formal letter of admonishment from the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics for his involvement with campaign donor David Chang. The investigation was later dropped when attorney Mary Jo White issued a letter of clearance. When Torricelli withdrew from the campaign on September 30, 2002, he stated that despite leaving public office in a different way than he had planned, he was proud of his service. Shortly thereafter, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Democratic Party could legally replace Torricelli's name on the ballot with that of former U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg. In 2007, Torricelli drew public criticism despite federal rules allowing retired officials to give leftover campaign funds to political parties, candidates and charities when his leftover campaign funds, given to the Rosemont Foundation, were not funneled back to his political party.
During his time in the Senate, Torricelli was a member of the Governmental Affairs Committee, Finance Committee, and Rules Committee.
I remember the replacement of Torricelli for Lautenberg very clearly. State election law didn't allow for last minute replacements on the ballot. The GOP candidate was beating Torricelli pretty badly, so he withdrew. The DNC replaced him on the ballot with Frank Lautenberg, a former US Senator and well-known name. The GOP argued that there wasn't time before the election to campaign against a new opponent--this was the purpose of the State law. The main argument by the DNC was that Democrat voters would be disenfranchised by not having a candidate on the ballot.
The Court put Lautenberg on the ballot. He won. The Senate was tied two years into GW Bush's administration. The GOP offered power-sharing in a misguided attempt to get-along (having the VP gave them the majority). Jumpin' Jim Jeffords changed parties and switched the balance to the Democrats. They didn't return the courtesy of the GOP. They took over every committee and ruled with an iron fist. All of this precipitated by the illegal switch in the NJ Supreme Court.