Groups threatening recall of Nevada Supreme Court justices

KRNV News ^ | July 17, 03 | Associated Press

[churchillbuff]

Groups threatening recall of Nevada Supreme Court justices

A recall effort could be launched as early as today against one or more Nevada Supreme Court justices.

No official notice has been filed. But Nevadans for Tax Restraint says there'll be a rally to highlight the issue at 4:30 Thursday afternoon at the Grant Sawyer state building in Las Vegas.

Conservative groups including the Nevada Eagle Forum and the Republican Liberty Caucus say Chief Justice Deborah Agosti and five other justices were wrong to set aside a constitutional provision that state tax increases pass by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature.

Leaders of the effort say they intend to announce this morning in Las Vegas when they'll start collecting the thousands of signatures they'd need to put a recall measure before voters.

[Pikachu_Dad]

"That doesn't give state courts power to strip people of their rights. State courts couldn't order your home confiscated and given to some big political contributor. It that happened, you could appeal to the federal courts for protection and relief."

WRONG.

They can and do strip people of their homes and give them to big political contributors. They do this under the divorce laws. Under the liberal sponsored laws, property is routinely stripped from men and given to women. Women are the majority voters in this country. They routinely sponsor the liberal party.

No, you can not appeal to the Federal system because they grant the right to hear 'domestic' issues to the State courts.




Actually,

[B Knotts]

Well, I hate to nitpick, but...

Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin were not recalled, the claims of the guy on that web site notwithstanding.

Recall has a very specific meaning: a recall election is a non-regular election that is brought about by petition.

In 1986, these three justices were up for their normal retention election, which California Supreme Court justices must face every four years. No petition circulating was necessary.

What happened in 1986 was a good thing (I voted against them, too), as the justices who were not retained were clearly out of touch with the voters, and is a good argument for regular retention elections for judges and justice nationwide, to keep them somewhat in line.

[B Knotts]

I should add that, of course, they lost that retention election, which was historic, in that it was the first time that every happened (see Sabertooth's post above).

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks, I believe that you are correct.

[goldstategop]

Start a recall drive against Kenny Guinn and replace him with a real conservative who will name replacements for the SCON Seven.

[goldstategop]

More like the SCOTUS could trump the Constitution's procedural safeguards on the grounds they were outweighed by more substantiative ends. What a scary thought.

[goldstategop]

Its more recent. It was adopted in two successive elections by 70% of the voters. The SCON violated the Nevada Constitution and nullified the will of the people. Its lawless justices need to be removed from office for their misconduct and soon. Their rulling is illegal and null and void. In the meantime, let them try to enforce it.

[Naspino]

The people are already being abused by the powers of their government. The last thing they need is to be penalized in order to punish the few who deserve it.

They might need a kick in the rear to realize that they've been subjugted and to get serious about the issue; otherwise Leno will make fun of them and they'll laugh about how partisan the Republicans are.

[David75]

True, but as far as I am aware, there is no conflict in this case. A right to education does not invalidate a 2/3 requirement on tax increases, or vice versa. Besides, I think the requirement was relatively recent, although the right to education may be, as well.

[Henrietta]

"True, but as far as I am aware, there is no conflict in this case. A right to education does not invalidate a 2/3 requirement on tax increases, or vice versa. Besides, I think the requirement was relatively recent, although the right to education may be, as well."

There is no conflict in the NV Constitution on this point; the "conflict" was concocted out of whole cloth by the Supremes in order to acheive their desired political outcome (6 of the 7 are DemoRats). Additionally, The rules of statutory construction demand that seemingly conflicting provisions of a statute be interpreted so as to harmonize them if at all possible. Here, they didn't WANT to interpret them harmoniously, becuase that would not have enabled them to legislate from the bench.

The NV Constitution says that the legislature shall appropriate money to pay for a common school system. The words thrown around by those trying to steal from taxpayers, words like "right," "fund," and "adequate" appear nowhere in this part of the constitution. Curious, no?

[David75]

Thank you for the clarification.

Their treachery is now much more apparent.

[CFC__VRWC]

They see what they've done, so now they're just trying to lay low in the hopes that the media will defuse the voter's anger by distracting them with Lacey Petersen coverage or some other similar rot. Once the coast's clear, they'll quietly ram the tax hikes through on an unrecorded voice vote in the dead of the night, and then chuckle to themselves while the media crows about their great victory.

IOW, don't lets these m***** f*****s get away with trying to scam the taxpayers in Nevada. Let them know that they can't take back what they've done, and that they've just killed their careers.

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

The article at the specified link has changed:

CARSON CITY, NV, July 18

Coalition calls for drive to recall Nevada governor, justices

A loose coalition of tax rebels and activists are calling for the recall of state Supreme Court justices and Governor Kenny Guinn over the state's deadlocked tax issue.

George Harris, of the Nevada Republican Liberty Caucus,organized a rally that drew about 60 people today to the Grant Sawyer state building in Las Vegas.

He says the state high court was wrong to set aside a constitutional provision for a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to raise taxes.

And he predicts that anger about the move will spur a grassroots rebellion that will sweep the state.

The focus of the rally wasn't just on a recall, which Harris and other activists concede would be hard to pull off.

Former Assemblyman and Henderson City Councilman Phil Stout wants an initiative drive to ban public employees from elected positions where they can vote raises for themselves.

Others want an initiative to ban the gaming industry from donating to candidates and political campaigns.

One Libertarian Party official says all taxes should be abolished. "Taxation is theft,'' he says.

(Copyright 2003 by The Associated Press.  All Rights Reserved.)

Too bad the media is giving prominence to some of the more nutty, off-message pronouncements of coalition members (namely, "Taxation is theft"). This isn't the time to change the focus from govt playing by the rules to arcane tax philosophy.

[thepriz]

In Nevada Justices are elected so they would have to be reelected not appointed by the Governor.

[thepriz]

This is my main problem with the increase in taxes. I don't think anyone knows what school funding should include. Now a days they add phyciatrists, speach therapists, ect... They cut Phisical Education, Music, and Art programs. Then the teachers are trying to force people to use these people they hire. For example A co-worker I know was told that his child had a speach problem and they should schedule to meet with the schools speach therapist. He took his child to a speach therapist that he paid for and was told that his daughter was fine. He then reported it to the school and the teacher got mad at him and said why did you do that we have to keep our people busy or we will loose funding. Needless to say, the teacher was going to hold the child back because of her dislike for this family.