Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VA Advogado
Berry and Wilson are trying to argue that that the terms are no longer staggered. However, once they become staggared (as they were made so prior to 1994 and thereafter validated with those changes) they are forever staggared. Anyone appointed in mid term serves only so long as the original appointee. They have no leg to stand on.

not true. The original laws for this committee stated specifically that an appointee was appointed only for the remaining term. When it was redrafted by congress they left this out. Also, I searched other committee statues under the same code section and they are explicit about a member only serving the remaining time of a term.

In the intstant case their is no language (like there is in other enabling statues) that provides for limiting a member to the remaining term.

13 posted on 12/08/2001 9:59:24 AM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: VRWC_minion
When it was redrafted by congress they left this out.

It was left out because it was no longer needed. As you can see it applied only to those alread in office on the date that statute was enacted. This is very common in legislation - to clarify how it is to be applied to the status quo at the time of passage and then many years later go back and remove it when its no longer relivant.

19 posted on 12/08/2001 10:04:21 AM PST by VA Advogado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: VRWC_minion
THe best way to handle this is to fire Berry. she is a cancer, and has been for years. You are wrong in saying she has any leg to stand on, all of the legal experts disagree with you, the standard has been set. The only people that get six year terms are the ones appointed by the president, end of story.
42 posted on 12/08/2001 10:48:32 AM PST by veryconernedamerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: VRWC_minion
Thanks for taking the other side on this. I don't agree with you, because the staggering seems implicit, and she took office tacitly agreeing to fill an unexpired term. I very much appreciate your pointing out that the matter is not simple and providing the basis for the rest of us to test our ideas.

In court, anything could happen.

Thanks!

56 posted on 12/08/2001 11:06:52 AM PST by Hagrid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: VRWC_minion
I'm not a lawyer, not do I play one on TV. However, I believe I've seen rulings before where the court decided, based on past editions of the law & of the law's consequences, that a standard phrase had inadvertantly been left out.

In this case, it was in past versions of the law, is clearly the accepted norm, and if not in would allow current members to resign, say, on Jan 5th prior to GWB taking office, clintoon appointing all to a 6 year term, and the new president would be stuck.

I think this witch is going to have her big butt handed to her on a silver platter. But I'll bookmark this thread, and repost when we know the outcome.

58 posted on 12/08/2001 11:09:12 AM PST by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: VRWC_minion
In the intstant case their is no language (like there is in other enabling statues) that provides for limiting a member to the remaining term.

There is the small matter that Wilson's appointment, a Presidential order by Bill Clinton states her appointment ends November 29, 2001.

133 posted on 12/08/2001 6:33:28 PM PST by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson