Posted on 03/31/2011 1:56:49 PM PDT by Jean S
Madison — A state law to sharply curb union bargaining by public employees is not in effect, a Dane County judge ruled Thursday, continuing the turmoil over a measure that sparked massive protests and prompted Democrats to boycott the Senate for three weeks.
Gov. Scott Walker's administration said it would comply and discontinue the implementation of the law.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
me thinks there needs be a WAr in Wisconsin.
Down with Verizon.
Joke, it’s a joke.
Any judges ever been hung in Wisconsin?
Come on, it’s a joke!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Whoa! I knew she reminded me of someone, you’ve nailed it!
And not only in appearance, but in bias, loyalty and temperament too!
Remember lawyers write the laws and judges are lawyers. They love to get into these “whose is bigger” contests because they know there are higher court judges who are also lawyers to figure things out. When Judge Sumi ultimately gets overturned there’s nothing she can do, but in the meantime she’s done her part to support her son the union employee and her liberal (and mostly lawyer) friends and co-workers. (Holler if you see a trend here...)
Hmmm....just like Obamacare is un-Constitutional, but the implementation in pursuit of the Agenda is not slowed down in the least bit, whereas, in Wisconsin, a ruling that the law is merely questionable and being pursued on Appeal, they will HALT implementation.
He could do like Obama did with ruling of Judge Vincent on Obamacare...simply ignore Federal Judge Vincents ruling that Obamacare is unconstitutional and continues to implement it.
Gov of Wisconcin should do same thing and invite Judge Summi to arrest him for contempt if she so desires.
But there is an exception to that law that makes it inapplicable to things like Senate Rule 93 that does not require advance notice, and merely requires that it be posted.
See clause (2) below and rule 93 of the Senate. Why is this not controlling? Is the Senate Rule not valid? Is the Exception to the Open Meeting law not valid? Someone help me out here.
19.87 Legislative meetings. This subchapter shall apply to all meetings of the senate and assembly and the committees, subcommittees and other subunits thereof, except that:
(1) Section 19.84 shall not apply to any meeting of the legislature or a subunit thereof called solely for the purpose of scheduling business before the legislative body; or adopting resolutions of which the sole purpose is scheduling business before the senate or the assembly.
(2) No provision of this subchapter which conflicts with a rule of the senate or assembly or joint rule of the legislature shall apply to a meeting conducted in compliance with such rule….
Rules of the Wisconsin Senate – See rule 93, especially clause (2)
Chapter 10:
RULES
Senate Rule 92. Continuity of senate rules. These rules shall be effective until amended or rescinded by the senate. The rules shall also remain in force at the beginning of a succeeding regular biennial session until superseded by rules adopted by the senate in such succeeding session of the legislature.
Senate Rule 93. Special, extended or extraordinary sessions. Unless otherwise provided by the senate for a specific special, extended or extraordinary session, the rules of the senate adopted for the regular session shall, with the following modifications, apply to each special session called by the governor and to each extended or extraordinary session called by the senate and assembly organization committees or called by a joint resolution approved by both houses:
(1) …
(2) No notice of hearing before a committee shall be required other than posting on the legislative bulletin board, and no bulletin of committee hearings shall be published.
(3) The daily calendar shall be in effect immediately upon posting on the legislative bulletin boards. The calendar need not be distributed.
(4) …
[cr. 1983 S.Res. 4]
[(intro.) am. 1989 S.Res. 3]
[(1) and (3) am. 1995 S.Res. 2]
This is one more example of why ALL judges EVERYWHERE — including the Supreme Court Justices of The United States — should now stand for election before the people at regular intervals.
There was a time when the judiciary didn’t seek to exercise the level of influence and control over the people as it does now, particularly the leftist part of same.
Laws and [most] public policy were passed/enforced by politicians elected to the executive and legislative branches of government.
But no more. We continually see judges and justices both overturning laws and implementing policy by judicial fiat. And thus, they are no longer merely judges or justices, but are now quasi-politicians.
As such, if they wish to continue to exercise such powers, it is only logical that they be subject to the same requirements of “elected” politicians — and that, of course, is to be required to stand before the people for election themselves.
One other thought. Do not the courts issue “opinions”? When did courts have the right to issue “orders”, other than for those purposes expressly authorized for them to do by state legislatures and the Congress? And yes, I know about Marbury v. Madison.
Andrew Jackson had it right.
Until ordinary Americans demand the same, there is little that can be done to halt the slide towards judicial oligarchy.
Just sayin’....
I absolutely 100% agree that this judge’s ruling stops this law from going into effect.
In Dane county.
And only in Dane county.
Have fun with your banana republic ruling judge.
So why doesn’t the Governor and the Congress give 24 hours notice and pass the bill tomorrow evening?
They don't want more riots and the bill was passed legally.
And can the pride! So what if it might look like the first time it was done it wasn't done perfectly! It doesn't matter. Just get the bill passed!
Your question is what I ask. Perhaps we the people need to understand there is no controlling authority by/between elected representatives of a higher ‘peoples’ rank than some conniving low level judge. And don’t try to tell me that only honest persons with integrity become lawyers who want to be judges. I have seen in my extended lifetime many of these ‘respectable’ people operating in the political world towards future power.
Your question is what I ask. Perhaps we the people need to understand there is no controlling authority by/between elected representatives of a higher ‘peoples’ rank than some conniving low level judge. And don’t try to tell me that only honest persons with integrity become lawyers who want to be judges. I have seen in my extended lifetime many of these ‘respectable’ people operating in the political world towards future power.
There is a section of the law that states the legislative branch is exempt if they are performing their duties in confromance to their rules. Rule 93 of the Wisconsin Senate for special seesions states the notice of a meeting only be put on the bulletin board. Rule 93 was followed.
LOL!! You nailed it! Bravo!
There’s a 1943 state Supreme Court ruling which states that the Senate makes its own rules. Why should one liberal judge be able to overrule a Supreme Court ruling?
Isn’t this the same judge that has a son in one of the unions and therefore, has a conflict of interest and should have recused herself...
except for the fact that only non-leftist judges ever have to recuse themselves for perceived bias due to that olde Democrat double-standard?
She has no basis in the law to do this, she can take a hike.
Especially since her family is involved in the unions, she has a massive conflict of interest.
agree, I have lived in Wawatosa (next to Milwaukee). There are some real dumb f---ers living there...
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.